Terse message networks

ABSTRACT

A tree-shaped mesh network is discussed which uses a mesh of wireless nodes that form a tree shaped network with one root node having a connection to an external network; chirp clients; and wireless network clients. Chirp clients comprise low cost chirp devices wherein said low cost chirp devices transmit short duration messages wherein transmission of said short duration messages are scheduled at preset transmission intervals. At least one wireless node of the mesh of wireless nodes is a designated chirp-aware node wherein said chirp-aware node sets the preset transmission intervals for chirp client communication by broadcasting a beacon prior to transmission by chirp clients and said chirp-aware node further comprises a bridge between the short duration messages and IP based devices wherein said bridge includes a wireless receiver to receive the short duration messages and is connected to said external network. The short duration messages are encapsulated into action frames, for onward transmission to other chirp aware routers. Each wireless node further comprises two logical radios and a service radio wherein each wireless node uplink and downlink operates on distinct non-conflicting frequencies. The wireless network clients communicate with the wireless nodes using node service radios.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application claims the priority benefit as a Nonprovisional of U.S.Provisional Application No. 61/895,393 filed on Oct. 24, 2013, presentlyexpired, the contents of which is incorporated herein by reference. Thisapplication also claims the priority benefit as a continuation in partof U.S. Utility application Ser. No. 13/627,883, filed on Sep. 26, 2012,patented as U.S. Pat. No. 8,923,186 on Dec. 30, 2014, the contents ofwhich is incorporated herein by reference.

This application claims priority as a continuation in part of U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/541,446, filed on Jul. 3, 2012, currentlypending, which claimed priority as a nonprovisional of the followingU.S. Provisional Patent Applications: 61/555,400, filed on Nov. 3, 2011,now expired; 61/621,926, filed on Apr. 9, 2012, now expired; and61/615,802, filed on Mar. 26, 2012, now expired. The contents of the'446, '400, '926, and '802 applications are hereby incorporated byreference.

The '446 application also claims priority as a continuation in part ofU.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/696,947, filed on Jan. 29, 2010,patented as U.S. Pat. No. 8,520,691 on Aug. 27, 2013, which was anonprovisional of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/148,803, filed onJan. 30, 2009, now expired. The contents of the '947 and '803applications are hereby incorporated by reference.

This application claims priority as a continuation in part of U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/571,294, filed on Aug. 9, 2012, currentlypending, which claimed priority as a nonprovisional of the followingU.S. Provisional Patent Applications: 61/555,400, filed on Nov. 3, 2011,currently expired; 61/621,926, filed on Apr. 9, 2012, currently expired;and 61/615,802, filed on Mar. 26, 2012, currently expired. The contentsof the '294 application are hereby incorporated by reference. The '294application also claims priority as a continuation-in-part to U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/541,446. The '294 application furtherclaims priority as a continuation-in-part to U.S. patent applicationSer. No. 12/352,457, filed on Jan. 12, 2009, patented as U.S. Pat. No.8,477,762 on Jul. 2, 2013, which claimed priority as acontinuation-in-part to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/266,884,filed on Nov. 4, 2005, patented as U.S. Pat. No. 7,583,648 on Sep. 1,2009, which in turn claimed priority as a nonprovisional of U.S.Provisional Patent Application No. 60/696,144, filed on Jun. 30, 2005,and as a continuation-in-part of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/434,948,filed on May 8, 2003 and patented as U.S. Pat. No. 7,420,952 on Sep. 2,2008, which was a nonprovisional of U.S. Provisional Patent ApplicationNo. 60/421,930, filed on Oct. 28, 2002, currently expired. The contentsof the '457, '144, '884, '948, and '930 applications are herebyincorporated by reference.

This application claims priority as a continuation in part of U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/952,781, filed on Jul. 29, 2013,currently pending, which in turn claimed priority as a continuation ofU.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/625,365, filed on Nov. 24, 2009,patented as U.S. Pat. No. 8,514,852 on Aug. 20, 2013, which was anonprovisional of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/117,502, filed onNov. 24, 2008, now expired. The contents of the '781, '365, and '502applications are hereby incorporated by reference.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention

The invention relates to a system and method of aggregating andtransmitting terse messages, especially terse machine to machinedatagrams, commonly referred to as chirps.

2. Background of the Invention

The invention, in one embodiment, is a system and method of integratingterse messages into a pre-existing network, in this case a wireless meshnetwork. The terse messages occur within the context of Internet ofThings (“IoT”) machine to machine (“M2M”) communications.

As networking continue to evolve, the burden on the IP packet routinginfrastructure increases. Moore's law has helped with processing speed,but Moore's law is linear —O(n)- while Metcalfe's law is exponential—O(n²). As networks grow, exponential growth will overtake linear-growthsystems. The growth of IoT is burgeoning and is occurring at the edge ofthe network. With IoT, a tipping point can occur, as the burgeoning M2Mcommunication with cloud based services consume IP bandwidth atexponentially faster rates—both within local M2M social networks and thelarger M2M social networks caused by multiple layers of publishers andsubscribers.

A need exists in the art for a system and method of accommodating M2Mand IoT communications within pre-existing networks without flooding thenetworks or decreasing their performance.

SUMMARY OF INVENTION

An object of the invention is to provide extensions to wireless meshnetworks organized in a tree topology. A feature of the invention isthat it adds terse messages to a tree-based topology network. Anadvantage of the invention is that it allows for terse messages to berouted within a wireless network in an optimal fashion.

Another object of the invention is to provide terse message or chirprouting protocols. A feature of the invention is that it includesrouting protocols using extensible network management. An advantage ofthe invention is that terse messages are efficiently transmitted over achanging network.

Yet another object of the invention is to provide improvements in thetransmission of terse messages. A feature of the invention is that itprovides several means of managing chirp contention as well as providingsecurity benefits. An advantage of the invention is that it facilitatescreation of large data sets from terse messages.

A further object of the invention is to provide control loop pollingintervals. A feature of the invention is that it provides a means forlocal decision making and local control. An advantage of the inventionis that devices are able to make autonomous decisions on basis of tersemessages.

Another object of the invention is to provide a classification-basedprotocol for routing. A feature of the invention is that it establishesterse message architectures, information encoding techniques andtransmission information into the system. A benefit of the invention isthat it creates agility at the edge of the network.

Another object of the invention is to limit latency and other forms ofunfavorable network performance within a network. A feature of theinvention is that it defines propagator nodes and networks to improveperformance. An advantage of the invention is that it ensures thatdatagrams are processed within a relevant time period.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWING

The invention together with the above and other objects and advantageswill be best understood from the following detailed description of thepreferred embodiment of the invention shown in the accompanyingdrawings, wherein:

FIG. 1 illustrates how the network topology is changed by selecting adifferent backhaul in a two-radio system, with one link to the backhaulAP and the other link servicing the child AP. It depicts four networktopologies. Each of the four network topologies provides a different setof performance in terms of latency and throughput. The mesh controlsoftware adjusts the latency and throughput parameters to meetvoice/video or data performance requirements in terms of latency andbandwidth.

FIG. 2 contrasts the conventional “Dual Radio” mesh with the LogicalTwo-Radio Mesh. On the left of FIG. 2, 2 radios labeled 010 and 020provide client connectivity and ad hoc mesh backhaul functionality,respectively. All the mesh backhaul radios (020) are on the same channeldepicted by the clouds of coverage of the same color (030). There areall part of the same sub-network. In contrast, on the right of FIG. 2,the same radio (025) provides service to clients and also backhaulfunctionality but operates in different sub domains depicted bydifferent color clouds of coverage (035). The left resembles a “hub”,the right a “switch.” Hubs are not scalable.

FIG. 3 shows how the structure of two-radio multiple hop mesh networkwhere each two radio unit services a Basic Service Set (BSS) byconfiguring one of the two radios to serve as an AP to its clients.Clients may include the second radio of another two radio system, withthis radio configured to run in station mode, providing the backhaulpath back to the Ethernet link. In the insert, the uplink radio (labeled010) connects to the parent mesh node while the downlink radio (labeled020) acts like an Access Point to client radios, including other meshnodes that connect to it through their uplink radio. Note that allservice radios (020) operate on different non-interfering channels,depicted by different color ovals.

FIG. 4 shows the similarities between FIG. 3 and a wired switch stackwith the same chain of connectivity 040-050-060. Both have the sametree-like structure and up link and down link connections. In both casesthe units (040,050,060) operate on a distinct sub domain.

FIG. 5 illustrates one embodiment of the two logical-radio approach withthree physical radios. Two radios constitute logically one radio of thetwo logical radio concept, while the third physical radio serves clientsas the second radio of the two logical radio concept. By eliminating thesharing of physical radios for both backhaul and client services, thebackhaul bandwidth has improved and also reduced the dependency to usethe same type of radios for the backhaul and the client. In the insert,the uplink radio (labeled 010) connects to the parent mesh node whilethe downlink radio (labeled 020) connects to the uplink radio of childmesh nodes. The service radio (labeled 030) act as Access Points toclient radios shown as triangles. One such is labeled 040. Note that allservice radios (030) operate on different non-interfering channels,depicted by different color ovals.

FIG. 6 illustrates another embodiment of the two logical radio approachbut with five physical radios. The uplink and downlink radios (shown asone radio FIG. 6) are split into two radios, in this embodiment, witheach responsible for one direction of traffic. Bandwidth is doubled andlatency halved, since traffic in the opposing direction now has its ownchannel or logical “lane”. Thus, the radio labeled 010 in FIG. 5 is nowradios 012 and 010. Similarly, the radio marked 020 in FIG. 5 is nowsplit into radios labeled 022 and 020. The radio pairs 012-010 and022-020 provide the same functionality as the radios labeled 010 and 020in FIG. 5 but with twice the bandwidth and approximately half thelatency.

FIG. 7 is an extension of the five-radio embodiment shown in FIG. 6. InFIG. 6, there is one service radio to service both voice and datacustomers. However voice and data traffic has different performancerequirements. By having different Access Point radios service the voiceand data clients, the contention between voice and data packetsattempting to gain access to the same medium is reduced. Also, withdifferent radios servicing the data and voice clients, the voice anddata packets can now be treated differently. The Access Point radiosservicing the voice clients could therefore be operating in TDMA (timedivision multiple access) mode while the AP radio servicing the dataclients operates in CSMA (Collision Sense Multiple Access) mode. The tworadios (032) and (034) thus provide different functionality. VoIPdevices such as phones connect to the former, data devices such aslaptops to the latter.

FIG. 8 is a five-radio extension of the three-radio configuration shownin FIG. 5 but with more dedicated service radios operating on differentfrequencies for different types of client radios.

FIG. 9 shows extensions developed and implemented in the mesh networkstack to provide an efficient backhaul for voice. The small voicepackets are concatenated into larger packets and sent (as one packet) atregular intervals to the backhaul radios. At each mesh node voicepackets intended for that destination are removed and the rest sent back(as one large packet). Salient portions include the Packet classifier(labeled 010) that recognizes voice packets based on size and regularityof transmissions, the VoIP concatenation engine (labeled 020) that“container-izes” small voice packets into a larger “container” packetfor more efficient transportation, Real time extensions (labeled 030) tothe Linux kernel enable the system to provide near real time performanceregarding sending and receiving the latency sensitive VoIP containerpackets through the network—regardless of what the Operating System isdoing at the time.

FIG. 10 is an application of the Hybrid Mesh concept to a Public Safetyembodiment. The node labeled 010 is a Stationary node on top of a lightpole, in this embodiment. A mobile embodiment shown as labeled 020 isentering the building (arrow) such as when carried by firefighters.These mobile units are also called “breadcrumb” routers. The Mobile Meshnodes provide connectivity to two-radio portable units worn by thefirefighters in this picture. All firefighters are thus connected tothemselves through a peer-to-peer mesh network shown as a thin line.They are also connected to the Infrastructure mesh backhaul through oneor more connect points. This ensures redundancy in network connectivity.

FIG. 11 is an application of the Hybrid Mesh concept related to a BattleForce Protection embodiment.

FIG. 12 depicts an embodiment using mesh nodes which feature four radioslots also used in the modular mesh framework of FIG. 13. There are twoslots for radio cards on the front and back. Up to four radios 010 arethus supported on a single embedded systems board. The radio cardantenna connections 030 are included for four radios. Two Ethernet ports020 provide wired access to provision wired uplink and wired serviceaccess.

FIG. 13 indicates the modular mesh framework, whereby a four slot board,as shown in FIG. 12, may be configured to provide differentfunctionalities: Two radio Backhaul (BH) 010; three radios BH+AP 020;four Radio with BH AP and Scanner 030; four radio with Full Duplex (FD)using a coupled two radio BH 040. Further, since the modular meshframework always forms a tree, these nodes are part of a switchhierarchy, as shown in FIG. 4.

FIG. 14 depicts how the installation software is tagged to both theradios and board characteristics. It shows a serial line connected toload the boot loader program, after which the Ethernet port is used tocomplete the software installation and branding process. Compiling theinstall program on the board it is intended to run on performs thisfunction, thus creating a unique software image.

FIG. 15 is a screen dump of the Flash Deployment software developed andimplemented to ensure that software generated for the install of thisboard cannot be used by another mesh node. When the softwareinstallation process begins, the software is compiled on the board it isintended for and the compilation process is unique since it is based ona number of unique factors. The software is generated on the board thatit is intended to run on—to ensure that the software image cannot beused to run on another board, thus preventing both software privacy anddissuading theft of the mesh nodes.

FIG. 16 shows that the Mesh Control Software sits above the Media AccessControl (MAC) of the radio. As such it is radio and protocol agnostic,in one embodiment.

FIG. 17 shows how channel interference is dynamically managed in thelogical two-radio system.

FIGS. 18 and 19 introduce an embodiment bridging across diverse wirelessmedium using the example of an N-Logical wireless medium bridge,referred to as the “nightlight” In one embodiment, the nightlight servesas both range extender and intermediary between device “chirps” and moreconventional, IP based, communication devices and protocols.

FIG. 20 shows the synchronization of multiple voice devices accessingthe same wireless medium with a focus on the time for bulk receipt ofpackets that are shared among the separate devices.

FIG. 21 shows a voice device talking to a dedicated voice radio and datadevices taking to a data radio, with one phone 2501, capable of takingto both 2502 and 2503 in one embodiment. The night light embodiment 2504manages both voice and data transceivers, in the depicted embodiment.

FIG. 22 depicts the dynamic collaboration tree for an exemplary supplychain application.

FIG. 23 shows an isolated mobile network cluster and communicationwithin it using VOIP phones.

FIGS. 24 and 25 describe an embodiment wherein isolated network clustersmay converge with distributed DHCP services and inherent conflictresolution using randomized sub net address ranges.

FIGS. 26 to 28 depict representative IP based “light” or low payloadpackets that may be used to transport chirp data over a IP basednetwork. 802.11 packets are used as examples. Chirp data is encapsulatedin such packets for onward transmissions, in unicast, multicast orbroadcast modes, in search of flower/agents/tunes/subscribers interestedin the chirp/pollen. In one embodiment, chirp devices use such innocuousframes to transport payload—only chirp aware routers know how torecognize them as chirp packets and process their (secure) routing toappropriate agents accordingly.

FIGS. 29 and 30 map the equivalent slots/ports of wired and wirelessswitch equivalents as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4.

FIG. 31 shows how logical radio modes, Uplink (U), Downlink (D), Scanner(S), Access Point for Service (A) map to physical transceivers in singleradio and multi radio mesh node embodiments. The joining of treebranches 3950 to tree trunks 3960 is aided by common routers 3952.

FIG. 32 is a simulation of a representative prior art mesh routingalgorithm and its comparison to tree based routing of FIG. 3. Thethicker blue lines in FIG. 32, 4040 denote the minimal spanning tree.Note the dashed lines have to be additionally recomputed for each nodein prior art mesh routing. Performance deteriorates exponentially as 0(n²) where n is the number of mesh members.

FIGS. 33 and 34 depict a switch equivalent of logical radios operatingin both wired and wireless mediums/channels, using Logical Radios Uplink(U), Downlink (D), Scanner (S) and O(n) routing. The logical radioswitching module (insert) is introduced.

FIGS. 35 and 36 show the bridging function (as described in FIG. 35).Mobile node 4455 switches from “blue” 5.8 G backhaul to a “pink” 2.4 Gbackhaul. The sub tree beginning with mobile node 4457 is thus operatingon a non-interfering channel/frequency/protocol. The static counterpartis 4460.

FIG. 37 depicts a “string of pearls” configuration of static mesh nodes.A mobile mesh node, traveling at 60 mph makes temporary connections witheach node in the string. Switching from node to another is seamless andunbroken, as noted by the video output below. The process is repeatedwith single radios embodiments, using logical radios. Bandwidth degradedalong the string of pearls, as expected, but video output was stilljitter free and unbroken, due to proactive Scan Control, FIG. 9, LogicalRadio abstractions and the benefits of O(n), tree based routing.

FIG. 38 depicts the dependency of latency sensitive traffic to thenetwork tree topology, specifically, the number of siblings in sub treesalong the route to the destination node/parent/root.

FIG. 39 depicts the use of a reserved time slot for transmitting bulked,latency sensitive data, whereby clients remain silent duringtransmission in this time slot. The time slot allocations may be fixedor variable.

FIG. 40 depicts broadcasts/streams restricted to a region. The regionmay be defined by geography, membership and mesh topology e.g. restrictthe number of hops or sub trees. Further, the region may includedirections: up/down or a set of turn by turn directions. An example ofregional streams may include a section of the home, where only siblingsof a sub tree need. Note that backhaul bandwidth is not affected outsidestipulated regions. Restricted broadcasting improves overall networkhealth.

FIG. 41 is effectively the reverse of FIG. 40 and is global: e,g. notrestricted. Tree based topologies favor global broadcasts. At theminimum, streams go up to the logical root. Streams can originate fromanywhere on the network Streams from the root are always downwards.While streams from nodes may be either, they are typically upwards.Streams from clients may be either upwards or downwards. The majority ofdevices populate the edge of the network and their pollen is typicallyupward bound, necessitating bulking, exception handling anddeterministic time mail delivery along the route.

FIG. 42 depicts the Stream Reader, an agent authorized to peer intonetwork router transmission and receiving packet queues, prior to theironward transmission through the network. Like Post office sorters, theyidentify and sort packets for scheduled deliveries, prune dead letters,duplicate messages etc. They also provide decoded outputs for Streamviewers, a custom GUI for the data. Stream readers may also forwardoutput to other readers, mail boxes or messaging systems.

FIG. 43 depicts a circuit diagram of Stream Readers and their associatedStream Viewers, wired together to provide a capability, in this case“feeding” a section of the composite view ports 5190. The composite viewport is back drivable since its connection may be to real or historicaldata.

FIG. 44 depicts the adapters and API interface components that providean extensible, open library of stream reader and viewers. This enablesthe rapid prototyping of custom circuits to provide specializedcompetencies. The view port additions enable human participation inmanaging the network health. This includes, through adaptor view ports,all assets of the network and their health.

FIGS. 45 and 46 depict the published interfaces for the Network ManagerStreams API and the Heart Beat Entity relationships, respectively.Together, they enable speedy viewport development.

FIG. 47 depicts an embodiment of methods outlined in FIGS. 39 through46.

FIG. 48 compares contemporary thin client, single control looparchitecture to a dual control loop, with a membrane separating the twocontrol loops but, through the chirp to IP bridge/membrane, there isbidirectional, pruned and selective traffic, based on collaborativescheduling of bus schedules in both directions. Note that the twocontrol loops are working on their own frequencies but neither iswaiting on the other, see also FIG. 38. This predicates the need for a“hub”, e.g. Propagator. They also serve as bridges between the uppercontrol loop, IP based and lower, tighter (low latency/isochronous)control loops preferably in more efficient chirp protocols. Note thatthe overhead of converting raw, machine specific raw data to a morepalatable device abstracted format (e.g. small data) is performed withinthe cloud in the single control loop model in one case, and delegated topropagators in the other. Further, the lower control loop, betweenpropagators and devices can be low latency/isochronous while the uppercontrol loop can focus on more infrequent high level tasks: performancetracking, exception handling system updates (event based, low latency),routine hourly reports (periodic) etc.

FIGS. 49 and 50 depicts a burgeoning market place “exchange”, where theconfluence of multiple sources of terse but potentially rich contentstreams, often in organic protocols occurs at propagator trees. The rootnode serves as the Chirp to IP bridge/membrane. Small data isprogressively refined and pruned, in proactive manner, as data movesupstream, like salmon upstream. Chirp packets no longer needed arediscarded along the way, thus managing content relevance. Since chirpsare category based, the protocol handlers (on both sides of themembrane) are logically part of the same publish subscribe bus system,with buses operating at different schedules. The distributed systemmanages the bus schedules to ensure control loops at all levels areoperating without disruption. An Analogy would be nationwide busservices involving both greyhound and county run bus servicescollaborating on bus schedules to minimize overall delay, based oncurrent traffic supply/demand.

FIGS. 51 and 52 depict a publish/subscribe exchange/market supportingmultiple devices and integrators each operating in their own privatecommunities/but also part of the same logical exchange. FIG. 51 is aexample of a small “exchange” of multiple data streams, operating ondifferent, non interfering wire-less media. The “vital signs” Integratoris fed exception and periodic, non urgent pruned data from thepropagator. The exchange between device and integrator is managed byhaving two segmented control loops, maintained by the propagator. FIG.52 is an example of a proactive control system, operating on theconfluence of both local and external data publishers. The propagator,with appropriate transceivers, picks up multiple sensor streams, from agrid of diverse sensor types. Local Integrators/Agents residing in thepropagator, can quick discern patterns and overall state of a largearea—since small data is being generated and shared across a local meshnetwork, see FIGS. 49 through 50. Local data streams are consolidated toprovide a composite view of the region of interest. This feeds a secondcontrol systems where big data publishers provide a more globalperspective. Thus, weather forecasts predicting rain, can cause thecloud server to direct the propagator network to direct which section ofthe corn field need additional local irrigation.

FIG. 53 depicts the simple circuitry needed to mass manufacture very lowcost, low footprint, light “pollen” generators. In millions of simpleEnd Devices, basic physical states will be converted to Chirp payloads.An address, “arrow” of transmission, and checksum are added to thispayload to form the complete chirp packet.

FIG. 54 depicts a first layer, rudimentary small data generator, wheresensor fusion/consensus generates early warning signals with fewer falsepositives. The propagator and first layer integrator may be bundled asone device, servicing both single and multi-sensor subscribers in thelocal meshed network and beyond.

FIG. 55 depicts a four leaf clover like propagator, with 4 independenttransceivers, 90 degrees rotated from each other. The 4 transceivers maybe logically assigned uplink, downlink and scanner functionality, basedon where the clients and relay node parents are located and the currentnetwork routing priorities. The transceivers may be dynamically andlogically reassigned as the network topology changes or as clientsmigrate into and out of the network. Note that, as other 4 port devicesdepicted in this application, there is only one uplink per the 4 leafclover design-it is scalable O(n) tree architecture. One layer isshown—overlays of such devices cover different wireless transmissionmedia (e.g. Infrared LEDS for Chirp and Bluetooth for IP networking). Astack of such four leaf transceivers than thus service both Chirp and IPclients, including other propagators. Since routing is lineage based,siblings are easily recognized. Ability to see siblings provides failover redundancy with minimal change to routing tables. This engendersstable, healthy networks.

FIG. 56 depicts a category classification based approach to publishingM2M data. The Marker Pointer tells the router/propagator/agent where tolook for the type of Pattern being used. Thus Marker patterns located atByte 6, would be part of the 6.X . . . family. A 4 bit Marker patternvalue of 15 would imply that data being published is part of the 6.4.15family. This coarse granularity may be sufficient to route the publisheddata in the general direction of interested subscribers. Further levelsof finer granularity are available to agents aware of what MarkerPattern 15 signifies e.g. how the category data in the 6 bytes of (openbut cryptic) finer classification data are expected to be read.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The foregoing summary, as well as the following detailed description ofcertain embodiments of the present invention, will be better understoodwhen read in conjunction with the appended drawings.

To the extent that the figures illustrate diagrams of the functionalblocks of various embodiments, the functional blocks are not necessarilyindicative of the division between hardware circuitry. Thus, forexample, one or more of the functional blocks (e.g. processors ormemories) may be implemented in a single piece of hardware (e.g. ageneral purpose signal processor or a block of random access memory,hard disk or the like). Similarly, the programs may be stand-aloneprograms, may be incorporated as subroutines in an operating system, maybe functions in an installed software package, and the like. It shouldbe understood that the various embodiments are not limited to thearrangements and instrumentality shown in the drawings.

As used herein, an element or step recited in the singular and precededwith the word “a” or “an” should be understood as not excluding pluralsaid elements or steps, unless such exclusion is explicitly stated.Furthermore, references to “one embodiment” of the present invention arenot intended to be interpreted as excluding the existence of additionalembodiments that also incorporate the recited features. Moreover, unlessexplicitly stated to the contrary, embodiments “comprising” or “having”an element or a plurality of elements having a particular property mayinclude additional such elements not having that property.

In the embodiment described in the instant application, the terse orchirp datagrams are transmitted within a wireless mesh network. Thedetails of the mesh network are described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,420,952 thecontents of which are incorporated by reference into the instantapplication. The relevant concepts of the tree-shaped mesh network aredescribed below.

Logical Radios and Tree Topologies

FIG. 29 maps the wireless transceiver having multiple logical radio“slots” of FIG. 12, 13 to the wired transceivers on the slots/ports ofyour typical switch/bridge/routers of FIG. 4. The Uplink, 3702, Downlink3706 and Service Access 3704, provide equivalent services in a switchstack hierarchy, see FIG. 4. Note that a single access point (AP) radioservices multiple wireless clients, hence it represents multiple“ports”. Further, while multiple Service Access and Down linkports/slots are typical, there is always only one UP link, since a treebased (non cyclical) topology, is being maintained at all times by MeshControl FIGS. 9, 16.

FIG. 30 explores this equivalence further. 3810 is a view into what the“Routing Modifications” 3810 of FIG. 16 entails. Based on a strict treebased formalism, radio/wired slots/ports are equivalently either auplink (U) or one of multiple downlinks (D), service access or APs (A)or scanners (S), 3830, managed by the Scan Control, FIG. 11. Those arethe only four types of logical radio modes allowed. Each Transceiver“slot” must map to a physical transceiver device that performs theoperation. Thus FIG. 9 shown a six slot/port switch, with four 802.11radio and two wired ports. Slots could be U, D, S, A in non overlappingtransceiver domains (e.g. Wi-Fi to 3 G, Infra Red to Power-line). Thisembodiment allows for bridging across disparate mediums, see FIG. 8, 18,19.

FIG. 30, 3840 depicts an embodiment of this principle for a fourphysical radio and six slot box, FIGS. 9 and 12. Here, each U,D,S,Alogical radio functions maps to a physical radio. In 3840 and itsequivalent switch embodiment 3850 each slot is performing a dedicatedfunction. This is desirable from a performance perspective but not arequirement: the mesh control layer is logical radio function based. Forexample, in FIG. 13, 010, AP or Service Access logical radio “A” isbeing supported by the same radio supporting BH downlink (D) services.

Similarly, in one embodiment using a purely logical radio functionality,a single physical transceiver/radio may share U, D and Sresponsibilities with dynamically allocated duty cycle for each, basedon application and present circumstances, see FIGS. 10, 11. The physicalradio may be directed to switch back and forth between distinct uplinkor downlink channels, for example, thus emulating a two radio backhaul.Or they may share the same channel, collaboratively reducing “stacking”of packet queues, to stay in alignment with requirements, see FIG. 1 and61/555,400.

FIG. 31, 3920, is an embodiment of a single Wi-Fi radio that issuccessfully employed to provide mission critical voice and videocommunication in military applications, as shown in FIGS. 10, 11. Sincethe embodiment uses a single radio, three U, D and S logical radios areshown supported by the same physical radio, 3920. 3930 shows a singleradio uplink connecting to a four radio downlink. In 3940 they form anisolated cluster, where each single radio mesh node performs U, D and S,logical radio functions/agents, see also FIGS. 10, 11. Further, thesingle radio connectivity linkage is a thinner “tree branch”, (blue)3950, connecting back to the backhaul or trunk of the tree (red) 3960.Thus, mesh node 3952, join the “red” and “blue” lines of two otherwiseisolated trees. It is providing the common router function described inSer. No. 10/434,948, Appendix A.

The SCAN Agent, FIG. 9, makes that bridge happen, in one embodiment. Thered and blue “channels” are intentionally distinct, on non-interferingchannels, possibly on different frequency bands e.g. IR and Wi-Fi, FIGS.8 and 18. Hence, mobile/temporal networks scan, using logical radio S,so they may join others on the “blue” line 3950. They may also apply aportion of their scan duty cycle in search for a “red” node, asdescribed in Ser. No. 12/696,947 and FIGS. 24, 25.

Further, if all the radios are operating the same “blue” channel, asshown, 3940, 3950, then throughout degrades with each hop, See FIG. 2,020. However, the routing overhead remains O(n) in tree based topologiesand hence low jitter and latency is maintained, see FIGS. 20, 21, 23.For example, in one embodiment, clear VOIP has been demonstrated 44+hops down in mining tunnels. Note that scalable tree based O(n) routingoverhead applies to both multi-radio 3910 and single radio 3920backhauls, As explained in a previous section, one distinctive benefitof the logical radio approach is Faster Routing Updates, because treelike structures are O(n)

In contrast, routing updates within prior art mesh architectures requireO(n²) resources. Ser. No. 10/434,948 Appendix A, reproduced herein,describes these mesh routing techniques and their limitations.Topologies are peer to peer, single physical radio backhauls. A minimalspanning tree must be maintained by each node. In a family of nsiblings, each sibling must re-evaluate its relationships with all theother (n−1) siblings. For all n siblings, the routing update is O(n²).In contrast, with tree based routing overhead is still O(n), even insingle radio chains, see FIG. 31, 3940, 3950.

This disparity between resource overhead in maintaining the mesh becomesapparent as the network grows—an inordinately large portion of systemresources are devoted to managing mesh infrastructure in prior artembodiments. As such, fewer resources are available for its intendedpurpose—providing proactive connectivity in static and temporal meshnetworks and their forming, joining, dispersal etc. Hence O(n²) networkssimply cannot scale beyond a tipping point. The tipping point may varyas newer radio technologies evolve and provide better throughputcapacity. But at some point the performance will be too sluggish to berelevant, especially in dynamic, mobile and temporal networks.

As smart phones proliferate, in some embodiments, the smart phones formtheir own mesh networks with both static (kitchen night light) andmobile (other smart phones) chirp aware devices. In some embodiments, anetwork is capable of maintaining communications with many such devices.A prior art single radio peer to peer network with O(n²) will beconsumed with overhead from routing and other functions within a fewhops and/or a few members, limiting its “Social Network” value. Incontrast, O(n) systems can exploit advancements in radio technologyfurther to stay “current”. The slot based system FIG. 12, 13, 19, 21, 22and their embodiments, FIGS. 30, 31, are future proofed—the radio cards,FIG. 12, 010, are removable and upgradable.

Smart phones provide wireless connectivity through Wi-Fi, Bluetooth andCellular. Chirps may travel via both IP and Cellular networks. SMSmessaging are used to communicate between smart phone agents andassociated chirp devices, in one embodiment. Thus, two phones may beused to remotely operate, monitor, control, or diagnose devices securelyand cost effectively via SMS also. In the example of remote videosurveillance, described earlier, a terse SMS e.g. “Cat in Kitchen” and asnapshot, can cover the essence of an exception handling update.

The Tree based routing favors single radio systems for smaller networksbecause of its capacity degradation of ½ with each hop. The degradationis half because the duty cycle is shared between uplink (U) and downlink(D) logical radio functions FIG. 31, 32. With SCAN S duty cycle added,the throughput degradation could be ⅓ per hop. For a three hop singleradio U+D network, it was 1/2³. For its U+D+S counterpart it is 1/3³ orthree times worse. Thus, there are limits to the capacity scalability ofall single radio mesh networks using single radio logical embodiments,over multiple hops.

The benefits of O(n) tree based topologies and routing are that evenwithin long chains and degraded capacity, latency and jitter are stilldeterministic, even in dynamic, temporal or mobile environments FIGS. 20through 25. VOIP like lightweight Chirp packets are efficiently routedeven in single radio versions of long chains (i.e. the “strings ofpearls”), FIG. 35. The distributed mesh control layer, 12, 20 selfcorrects U,D,S resource allocations dynamically through heart beatupdates and routing modifications, in one embodiment. FIG. 16 includingusing toll costs and hop costs, as described in Appendix A, manage theoverall health of the network, FIG. 1.

Thus, when recent history of scans and/or GPS readings by/from smartphone embodiment indicate that the soldier FIG. 31 has slowed down, themesh control layer proactively reduces the duty cycle of the SCAN Sfunction to mostly quick scans. Interspersed within those quick scanswould still be one or two periodic “detail” scans, in one embodiment.Thus the system would stay in dynamic alignment to changes inmotion/situation, per methods also described in Ser. Nos. 11/818,889,61/555,400 and 61/615,802, while using the radio for functions otherthan Scanning (uplink, downlink, client service/access).

FIG. 32 is a simulation of prior art mesh routing algorithm and itscomparison to tree based routing for single radio mesh networks. Thethicker blue lines in FIG. 32, 4040 depict the minimal spanning tree.Note the dashed lines have to be additionally recomputed for each nodein prior art mesh routing. Over multiple hops single radio backhaulssuffer from both throughput degradation and faster routing updates. Theformer degrades by ½ with each hop, the latter with O(n²) where n is thenumber of nodes in the peer-peer network. Hence routing table updateswill increase to O((n+m)²) with m additional new members. In sharpcontrast tree based routing, with the logical radio abstractions inplace, will still be linear: O(n+m))

Tree based mesh routing segments the collision domains, FIGS. 3 through7. Each BSS in FIGS. 3, 5 is operating on a non-interferingfrequency/channel. Further bridging across transmission domains, FIGS.8, 18, is analogous to adding more frequency/channels for the BSS tooperate in. In one embodiment, dynamic channel management manageschannel changes, see FIG. 17, all with the intent of reducing channelcontention. Reduced contention enables CSMA/CA and CSMA/CD back offalgorithms to be more efficient. Jitter and Latency becomedeterministic, as taught in Ser. No. 11/266,884, FIGS. 20, 21.

“Natural”, healthy branch growth thus encourages “radios” operating indifferent “channels”, forming non-interfering logical sub trees. Havingmore “channels” would favor smaller sub trees and more of them. Manywould operate autonomously with the occasional need to chirp back statusand receive email/firmware updates. Thus multi-transceiver chirp capableproduct may serve as embodiments of the slot based modular meshframework, see FIGS. 12, 13, 19, 22. The smart phone is a candidate, inone embodiment. An IR chirp based transmission can be picked up on theIR “slot” and forwarded through IR (as in single radio mode, FIG. 31,3940). Or the phone and/or receiving node in some embodiments may bridgeIR and Wi-Fi Slots, see FIG. 18, 19. Or parts of the transmission may beover IR interspersed with Wi-Fi, where IR was not available Further theymay serve as temporal common routers 3952 to provide intermittentconnectivity to otherwise isolated temporal or mobile networks, 3940,operating on their own private channels and dialects.

The physics of wireless communications also favor smaller, close knitsemi-autonomous “village” clusters, Reduced radio power reduces therange but also adjacent channel interference (adaptive power control isdescribed in Ser. No. 10/434,948). A kitchen chirp awarenightlight/router embodiment thus supports a small, select chirp family,operating quietly on a common channel and possibly with their ownmachine Esperanto, in one embodiment. Common routers FIG. 31, 3952, andtheir agents provide intermittent connectivity to these largelyself-sufficient clusters. A matrix of collaborating yet largelyautonomous and scalable ant-like communities emerges.

In this embodiment, the routing overhead for all such rooted trees inthe “park” would be 0 (n * r) where n is the size of a representativesub tree and r is the number of “root” nodes servicing them. In FIGS. 3,4, r is two.

From the perspective of the mesh control, FIGS. 9 and 16, distinctionsbetween wired or wireless cease to be relevant, In one embodiment of theN-Logical radio concept, a bank of logical radios/transceivers 4130,FIG. 33 supports multiple otherwise isolated trees through common routerfunctionality. Each bank is a “switch” with dynamically reconfigurableslots. A slot in the switch is equivalent to a slot in FIG. 12, 010.FIGS. 9, 12 has six such slots: four “radio” slots 010 and two Ethernetports 020. Similarly 4130, 4270 depict six port configurable switches,in a switch stack hierarchy. Note that the two trees, wired andwireless, provide redundant fail over functionality. FIG. 12 shows a sixslot switch in one embodiment. One of the 4 radio slots 010 will supportwireless backhaul services. Separately, the two Ethernet ports 020, aredynamically configured to provide the wire-based uplink and downlinkbackhaul, see FIG. 34, 4260. Thus, while in a tree based topology,routing is limited to North-South, adding another set of logical radiosnow includes “East”, “West.”

Switch port embodiments support (intermittent) wired and wirelessconnectivity. In one embodiment, a single-radio unit, 4110, has beensuccessfully reprogrammed to provide a U, D, S capabilities, singly andin combination. The switch ports themselves are also reprogrammed sothat some ports may be configured to provide 24V Power Over Ethernet(POE) to the single radio units. Note that units 4140, 4150, 4145logical radio agents U, D, S may be serviced by one physical radio 4110,see FIGS. 10, 11, 31, 32.

In one embodiment, a logical radio agent S, 4150 hears uplink 4120operating on a different channel than downlink 4140 is currently on—andtherefore cannot “hear” uplink 4120. The Scan Function, FIG. 9,communicates this with the adjacent Mesh Control, FIG. 9. Downlink 4140is directed to change its channel temporarily to provide intermittentservice to Uplink 4120. Connectivity is intermittent: both uplink anddownlink may also be servicing other clients, at other times, per thecollaborative scheduling and queue/stack management, see 61/555,400.Buffering packets during scan requests is described in Ser. No.11/818,889.

FIG. 34, depicts an embodiment showing a “wired” equivalent tree to4160, Multiple wired and wireless links, 4160 and 4260 may concurrentlyexist, providing intermittent connectivity to isolated clusters. 4260.In this embodiment, a common router 4270 has two uplinks, but operatingin orthogonal domains of wired and wireless and hence permitted by themesh control layer, responsible for ensuring tree based (non-cyclic)routing. 4270 may thus also provide bridging services e.g. for IRtransceivers, see FIGS. 18, and 19.

FIG. 35 is a schematic of how the logical radio abstractions may becombined to create more complex abstractions. 4320 refers to twoabstractions AP (also in FIGS. 9, 13). The “bridge” is a combinedlogical radio abstraction, similar to the U+D backhaul, FIG. 13, butbridging over disparate frequencies and protocols. FIG. 36 shows thebridging function (as described in FIG. 35). Mobile node 4455 switchesfrom “blue” 5.8 G backhaul to a “pink” 2.4 G backhaul. The sub treebeginning with mobile node 4457 is thus operating on a non interferingchannel/frequency/protocol. The static counterpart is 4460. Thus,private networks are formed, occasionally bridge (FIG. 31, 3930, 3952)but for the most part operate autonomously.

Mission critical mesh networks favor more “channels”, for wired-wirelessfailovers, FIG. 41. Embodiments installed in underground mining tunnels,for example, deploy a string of mesh nodes, FIG. 12, to provide voiceand video over multiple hops deep inside mines. Each mesh node supportsboth wire and wireless up links and downlinks at each node in the chain,see FIG. 31, 3940. Traffic is cloned to travel along both parallelpathways. On arrival at each node it will be forwarded on the mostreliable link, wired or wireless and so on. Thus a packet may crossoverfrom wired to wireless (where the wire has been cut) and back multipletimes. The duplicate packets, like duplicate heart beat broadcasts, arediscarded by the destination station's parent, a mesh node, FIG. 12.

Embodiments employing “string of pearls” configurations are also used inmobile military applications. In FIG. 37 upper, a mobile unit makesintermittent connectivity to each static mesh node in turn. This ismanaged by the Scanning radio functions, FIG. 9, described in Ser. No.11/818,889. Note that mobile unit backhaul connectivity is intermittent,but the output is not. Real time video streams are being seamlessly“switched” to the mobile unit jitter free and without interruption, seeunbroken throughput graph. This was “raw” video—the efficiencyenhancements described in 61/117,502 would further improve performance.Chirp based control packets were also exchanged during this exercise,without interruption, using IP packets formats, see FIGS. 26-28.

The process was repeated with single physical radios in a chain, FIG.31, 3920. Bandwidth degraded, as expected, but the system still provideduninterrupted, jitter free, video, due to proactive SCAN agents, FIG. 9,Logical Radio Abstractions, FIGS. 30 through 34 and the benefits of O(n)tree based routing, FIGS. 3 through 7.

In summary, the wireless networks used in the system described hereinuse a strict tree-shaped relationship, which results in limited routingcosts when adding new clients or network participants. The tersemessages or chirps are added to this efficient network, as describedbelow.

Switching Parents and Scan Management

At the base level, propagators are relays, connecting to a “root” node,thus forming a tree. On power up, its primitive behavior is to becomeassociated with a parent, which provides a path up stream to the rootnode, the closer to the root node, the better. The preference maytherefore be, at a rudimentary level, to connect to parents with a lowhop count, 0 for the root, 1 for one removed etc. However, M2M trafficis moving mostly upstream, hence, there is more contention closer to theroot. Hence, in addition to noting the candidate parent nodes within itswireless radio “zone”, propagators must also be able to send a “proberequest”, to determine the signal quality for transmission.Additionally, it would need to know how many siblings it will need tocontend with. Since siblings are part of their own sub trees, thedescendants of those siblings are also, indirectly competing for the“mother” parent node's attention. In short, that is a lot of informationto sift through before selecting a parent. And it would change in a fewminutes, in dynamic or mobile environments. A simplified notification ofthe presence to a candidate parent is required. At the base level,connected Nodes transmit, through heartbeats, their “lineage” and“costs” of connectivity, e.g.

1. Their name2. Their Parent's name3. How many hops they are from the root node (“hop cost”)4. The “Toll Cost” of using this node—e.g. its availability

a. Based on current processing power usage at node

b. Based on number of active chirp and propagator descendants

c. Its overall link quality of path back to root node

d. etc

NAME-PARENTNAME-HOPLEVEL-TOLLCOST thus defines a broadcast beacon, inone embodiment. Recall names are not unique, simply unique within alineage sub tree. Hence node names, all the way up to the root, may beduplicated—as long as the lineage path remains unique. Thus two siblingnodes may not share the same node name. Hence a new node with the samename as a current child node, will not be allowed to join that sub tree.

The decision to join is then simplified to whether a prospective parenttoll cost/hop cost ratio meets desired characteristics of current chirppackets that the orphan node would be transporting. The orphan node,does not actually know what that data profile would be—it has not yetjoined a network.

It does have access to chirp devices in its vicinity and can performrudimentary profile analysis, with the presumption that this is arepresentative sample set. Based on the profiling, if more latency isacceptable, higher hop cost would be acceptable. Else, a switch to anode closer to the root, but at a higher toll cost, will be initiated.

This is, at best, an approximation to an actual link quality, whenconnected, and then having actual chirp devices connected to it.

One is tempted to suggest that the propagator make a hasty connectionand perhaps later, switch parents but this is costly. Nodes may switchparents constantly, causing local oscillations (switching back and forthbetween sub trees), which eventually percolate to the top.

“Mother” Nodes can therefore not leave the nest, while descendants areswitching around—it would simply feed the chaos. Hence decay functionsare built into the hierarchical control system that manages the networktree topology. Permission to switch parents travels at least as far upas the parent of both sub trees—since both are being affected by theswitch. There, if there nodes have settled down from the previousswitch, permission is granted.

In order to discover candidate parents, each relay node needs to scanits environment periodically, preferably a broad scan covering multiplefrequency channels available to the transceivers. If it has a dedicatedscanning radio then its normal function of transporting chirps is notinterrupted. Else, it must request a scan “lunch break” from its parent,in order to use its radios to scan on other frequencies than the one itis using. At that point, it will need to tell its incoming link from itsparent, to “hold all messages”. During that period, the clients areeffectively temporarily detached, see FIG. 49.

A parent node would have multiple scan requests, which would bepermitted in some weighted, round robin manner, weighted in favor nodeswith more clients, for example. Using such a round robin scheme, eachsibling node of a patent would be granted a timed lunch break, so thatno two siblings scan at the same time, thereby missing each other. Thesiblings may know of each other but without mutual probe requests, havelittle knowledge of the signal strength and tested link quality.Further, since the current “mother” parent's siblings (e.g aunts) arealso potential parent candidates, none of them may be in scan modeeither. Hence the scan request is being permitted by a parent's parentor grandmother. By the same token, the decision to allow a node toswitch is therefore also addressed by at least a grandparent to therequester node.

In general, changes within a sub tree (child moving from mother to aunt)will not affect the grandparent aggregated upstream throughput—sinceboth the aunt and mother are its children. Hence, if the shift requestis within parent's siblings, the perturbation is contained and temporal.In general it is at least grandmothers of the intended parent candidateprovide the final permissions.

For network topologies with less than a few hops, it is more efficientto let the root node address both switch and scan requests. The rootnode is generally more processor and memory equipped, since it alsohandles the IP to chirp interface. As one of many “hubs” for the chirpbuses, it is also the logical place for small data subscribers andagents to reside. Some of those agents, Navigational agents, may wish tohave a say in the changes in network topology. Thus agents are part ofthe control plane managing the physical network. Since the physicalnetwork and logical network map to each other, the only option is tochange the network topology, by moving nodes around, based on the global(root level) toll cost/hop cost criteria. The network topology is thusmanaged to be in dynamic alignment to subscriber demand.

As in insect colonies, the primary function of every node, all the wayfrom the edge/branch nodes to the root node is identical. Each nodewishes to improve its lot, but with a view to long term networkstability. This is akin to ant or bee colonies, where the common goodaffect all positively. Thus a node may be directed by the root node toswitch parents because it would streamline the publishing stream. Ornodes may be directed to disassociate a chirp child and have anothersibling (aunt) adopt the orphan. Thus each of the sibling nodes may,over time, become specialist hubs for category clusters and the socialnetwork coalesces towards more efficient routing. This is akin to treeschanging their growth to favor changes in sun direction. AdaptiveNetwork trees, like natural trees are driven by the common good of theentire tree, including all constituents, down to the chirp devices atthe edges.

Chirp Routing Protocols

Chirps, like pollen, are often simple and lightweight, for reasonsexplained above. In one embodiment, they use low cost and low overheadIR based transceivers, see FIG. 18. The chirp may be relayed throughpropagation agents via multiple hops. Eventually it reaches the port ofentry in the chirp aware router—using transceiver slots operating in thesame medium as the chirp or its relay agents, see slots in FIGS. 6, 7,9, 12, 13, 19.

FIGS. 6, 7 show transport up to the root node using dedicated backhaulsfor VOIP chirp-like packets and data. In another embodiment, the chirpdata maybe converted by agents to travel in another packetformat/protocol, see 22 in FIG. 8. Then, after the first hop, IR chirpdata would be converted to Wi-Fi based chirp data formats, see FIG. 18.Or, in another embodiment, chirp devices may share the same Wi-Fispectrum, as described below.

In an embodiment where the chirp devices and Wi-Fi devices share thesame Wi-Fi spectrum, the chirps are “simple”, they operate clumsily andthe agile IP based Wi-Fi devices must proactively avoid contention. Thisagility may be provided by Access Points, in one embodiment. One slot ofnightlight embodiments, FIG. 13, 020, indicates a four slotconfiguration with an Access Point. Another slot, could house an IRtransceiver. Once received, the chirp must eventually be converted intosome Internet Protocol compliant packet, to travel upstream/downstreamin search of interested flower/agent/tunes.

Internet Protocol uses a “From” and “To” addressing scheme. Thisinformation is generally public, for IP based routing (wired andwireless) to work. FIG. 26 shows a representative Wi-Fi Request-To-Send(RTS) packet format. RTS announces the intent to transmit and specifiesthe “to” (receiver) and “from” (transmitter) addresses, see 3424, 3426.The Frame Control data, 3420 at the beginning of the packet containspertinent information such as power management features intended foraccess points to know when the device will awake and thus buffer itspackets. This is also relevant to chirp devices and their interactionswith night lights. Note that Frame Control Data may be used an existingprotocol to communicate a distinctly different form of addressing,related to pollen and flower/agents Chirp communications are not limitedon strict requirement of providing a fixed “to” addresses, as isdescribed herein.

The Duration Field, 3422 indicates time of transmission requested, whichWi-Fi stations use to set their Network Allocation Vector (NAV) andavoid contention. In one embodiment, to prevent network congestion andto prevent transmittal of outdated chirps, even blind chirpdevices—chirping randomly—can provide this information. Co-locateddevices can then be agile and avoid stepping on their clumsy fellowdancers in the same RF space. Note also that, an RTS is typicallyfollowed by a CTS or Clear-To-Send from the Access point managing 802.11stations associated with it. Therefore, if chirp devices specify theirperiodicity, or the transmission pattern they are following and theircurrent pattern sequence index, then the APs can preempt contention atthe expected chirp transmission time by sending a CTS ahead—like apolice car siren, it warns both IP aware and Chirp aware (hear and send)devices of other, unexpected traffic.

Vendor specific chirp information exchange may be supported in the802.11 standard through Action Frames, see FIG. 27. In one embodiment,these contain 1 byte for Category and 1 Byte for Action type, see FIG.27. Hence there are 255 non trivial categories of information, with 255non trivial types of data being sent, each of which has 255 non trivialDialog Tokens—expressing data formats. With appropriate filters oneAction Frame could provide data for multiple agents/tunes in a compacttransmission. Note that, akin to the RTS packet, it contains Durationinformation. It may also contain the chirp equivalents of DestinationAddress DA, 3520, Sender Address SA, 3522 and BSSID, 3524. DA and SArelate to Receiver and Transmitter Addresses in the RTS, FIG. 26. BSSIDmay be loosely thought of as a chirp in search of a specific“flower”/tune/agent.

Chirps may thus be encapsulated in exemplary Wi-Fi Action Frames, foronward transmission to other chirp aware routers. The packets willtravel through prior art—and not chirp aware—routers without incidence.The exemplary Action Frames may be sent in unicast, multicast orbroadcast modes—this is dependent on the Destination Address DA. ShouldIP multicasting be used, then, with IGMP protocols, chirps will beefficiently transported to the interested members of the multicastgroup. Efficient transport mechanisms have been described in Ser. Nos.11/266,884, 11/818,899, 12/696,947 involving bulking, scheduleddelivery, servicing isolated clusters, maintaining SIP like registries,etc. are all are applicable to chirp transports over IP. If thesubscribers/agents are not known or choose to be hidden, then IP groupbased multicasting (e.g. IGMP) is not useful. A more brute forceapproach is needed. This is broadcast mode, where the Chirp packets maytravel both upstream and downstream of the mesh tree.

Broadcasting is how pollen reaches the “interested” flowers in nature.As long as the broadcast durations are managed, flooding and networkcongestion is contained. For example, mesh network nodes described inthis application send out “heart beats” announcing their presence andcurrent state regularly in broadcast mode. Heart beat counters are usedto avoid resending of “old” packets. Second, the mesh topology istree-like, hence broadcast directions are limited to up, down or local(within siblings). Third, the packets themselves may be encoded withtime to live function or the maximum number of mesh tree hops. Thesemethods have been successfully applied to contain flooding in a treebased mesh network. They are be reapplied to “chirp” heart beats,maintained by the routers, if needed, in one embodiment.

In the event chirps need to leave the mesh network and enter nonchirp-aware networks, flooding control is used, with time to livefunctionality employed in one embodiment. Additionally, the bulkcontainer bus delivery service is specifically designed to efficientlysend packets over non chirp aware networks by forwarding them to a chirpaware router at the other end, using standard IP based routing, withapplicable encryption. Thus chirps will get to where they need to go, totheir agents/tunes/flowers, using either multicasting or broadcastmodes.

While (pruned) broadcasting techniques will get the chirp to theinterested flowers, it is over-provisioned, like allergy season. Oneapproach to providing more routing information is to specify both anavigation agent and a data handling agent in the same chirp. Thenavigation agent accesses a portion of the chirp packet. Access islimited to the routing/navigation of the chirp, not its payload.Navigation directives may be either physical or logical. Physicalnavigation is turn-by-turn directions e.g. three nodes up, third childsibling node down, stop. This is useful when private and static networksare deployed. Logical navigation is more flexible e.g. move up withinthree hops in search of Agent-For-GE-Toaster, stop. If the agent is notfound, then put the chirp in a lost and found area in a community mailbox for forwarding to mobile agents. For example a kitchen night lightprovides updates, via smart phone agents, to a user, when he returnshome, in one embodiment.

Extensible Network Management

FIG. 38, a reprint of FIG. 10 of Ser. No. 10/434,948, explains whynetwork latency and topology are inter-related and hence relevant tolatency sensitive VOIP/Chirp bus delivery schedules. Ser. No.10/434,948, teaches a round robin approach where, the AP services eachclient in turn. In that example, 10 ms is the (equal) service durationfor individual client services. Packets are buffered till a round robincycle is complete. At the end of each cycle the container is sent, perup the tree, in one embodiment. The local latency upper bound wouldtherefore be 30 ms for section 70. By the same token, the root node isservicing 5 clients and hence the upper bound to reach the root node is50 ms for sections 70, 80. Further, the example pointed out that, hadall the nodes been connected directly to the root node, the latencywould be 90 ms. 1 hop networks—all clients connected to a root node—arenot necessarily “better”. A five-hop string-of-pearls, O(n) routingscheme, FIG. 37, may provide better service, than the 1-hop 5-clientstar, FIG. 38, Section 80.

Thus, in one embodiment, bus delivery schedules are driven by the roundrobin delay caused by servicing siblings, at each sub tree along aroute. More siblings imply more latency and favor node/devicemigrations. Accordingly, network topology is dynamically modified basedon toll costs of larger “families” see FIG. 1 and Appendix A.

In FIG. 38, nodes operated independently and asynchronously but based ona common multiple of some service time interval e.g. 10 ms. Minimum BusIntervals vary, based in the number of siblings. In Ser. No. 11/266,884,FIG. 20, the bus interval is set. Buses leave at preset intervals,regardless of whether the bus is full or not. In more efficientimplementations, the departure time is flexible, and buses may wait tillmore passengers arrive, within a prescribed waiting limit, see61/555,400. Thus the stream and CSMA allocations are based on“stacking”, in dynamic alignment with “Customer Satisfaction”.

In FIG. 39, the bulk bus transport stream 4720 is first, during whichall clients can listen but not talk, see FIGS. 9, 20. The remainder time4750 is used to transfer data back from IP based clients to nodes etc.Further, FIG. 21 shows separate “channels” for concurrent transmissions.Contention is reduced during the Stream section, 4720 and possibly more.SCAN agent, FIG. 9, measures overall activity of disparate packet types(a form of “channel list”). Note that in Wi-Fi standard infrastructuremode, all communications are with the AP, hence tree based routing isinherent.

In one embodiment, regular chirps/heart beats are received by the nodethrough one of its logical “slot” interfaces. IP traffic is alsoreceived from a slot interface. Both data types are then priority queuedfor onward transmission. Further, the data may be limited for localconsumption, e.g. regional streams, FIG. 40, or sent upwards and/ordownwards e.g. Global streams, FIG. 41. Thus, the amount of trafficflowing through the network is lumped together. The ability to identifydifferent traffic regions, their locations and patterns is therefore ofvalue to network administrators and VOIP/chirp device manufacturersalike. The ability to record and play back sequential snapshots ofnetwork topology changes is also relevant to simulation, diagnostics andadaptive learning.

FIG. 42 depicts the stream reader, in one embodiment. Special purposeStream Readers are privy to data traffic queued for transmission at anode. Like post office sorters, they identify and sort the “mail” andtherefore, help to collectively define bus schedules, reduce dead letterre-transmissions etc. Stream readers, resident at the node, feel the“pulse” and therefore provide early warning signals to the Mesh ControlLayer. More “mail” from one node may increase toll cost for other childnodes to switch parents, using load balancing and adaptive power controlmethods, Ser. No. 10/434,948 and FIG. 1. The use of resident agents inAccess Points, to manage flow, was also first introduced in Ser. No.10/434,948.

Stream readers can feed multiple stream viewers, 5040, sequentialreaders/agents, 5060 or a logging database 5080 community mailbox etc. Acircuit of collaborating stream readers and subscribers emulate complexlogistic supply chains, see FIG. 43, 5120. Disparate traffic data issent to knowledge repositories 5180. Secure Control lines from it, 5170,drive sub-circuit behaviors and their outputs, 5125, 5135, 5155.Repositories may also provide the secret handshakes needed by readers tocorrectly decode public network traffic 5150. Thus bulk network traffic,5150 may employ little or no encryption and thus be lightweight, likepollen. Further, the Network Viewer 5190 may be connected to the realtime stream plug in circuit 5145 or run it in playback mode, 5165 fromknowledge repositories 5180. The same circuit based framework 5120 mayalso provide interleaved real time and historical trending, simulationsand machine learning, FIG. 44, 5290 and 61/555,400. Note that 5155 isnot connected—it is in “connectionless” broadcast/multicast mode. Thusboth direct and indirect subscription styles are supported within thesame stream reader framework.

From a control systems perspective, a network management system (NMS)receives node heart beat data and provides snap shot views for bothhuman and automated agents. The circuit based approach engendersrewiring—swapping in/out data sources, or using consensual data frommultiple readers to drive inferences, see 61/555,400. They may also beused to monitor different types of streams in addition to the Heart beatstreams published by the nodes. For example, in FIG. 47, 5520, a customheart beat was introduced in the Settings Viewport, for bidirectionalMachine to Machine (M2M) data streams inside mobile/isolated man andmachine clusters, FIG. 31, 36, 37. This enables both human and automatedagents to monitor and control remote machinery and their operators.Further, FIG. 47, 5530 depicts the current mesh topology in dark lines.The lighter lines are alternatives gleamed from mesh node heart beats,which in turn was gleamed from SCAN agents, FIG. 9. Also in FIG. 9, thePacket Classifier 010 and VOIP Concatenation Engine, 020 areparticularly relevant for terse M2M messaging. Their status/health isalso monitored, 5520. The client activity and alerts, 5540 are generatedby M2M readers at the node interface, which in turn are received bysubscriber agents. They generate the alert for the machine maintenancesubscribers.

Since the health of a network is only as good as its participants, thereexists a need for an extensible and open framework for rapidlydeveloping means to view, within one dashboard, salient or relatedbehaviors of complex man and machine networks—especially when they areintertwined. Ideally, a comprehensive open network management systemmanages the health of the network routers (and it components, FIG. 9)and also the health of its clients: humans and devices. This closerrelationship ensures dynamic alignment in fast changing pace of globalsupply/demand chain of data flow.

One embodiment of an open extensible Stream Reader Framework, FIG. 44,is implemented in Java. A subset, JavaScript API 5230, provides dynamicand customizable HTML based views. Custom Stream viewers define the GUIfor different devices and form factors. More complex business logicapplications use the Enterprise class Java API and Repository 5240.Third party adapters and applications, 5250, extend the network toconsumers/providers of information and their viewers. FIGS. 45 and 46depicts the published interfaces for the Network Manager Streams API andthe Heart Beat Entity relationships, respectively. Together, they enablespeedy viewport development, FIG. 57, for extensible human and agentcollaborations e.g. FIGS. 1, 10, 11, 16, 20, 23, 24, 31, 34, 36, 37.

Additional Approaches to Managing Chirp Contention

The typical chirp data transport data packet must necessarily besmall/light, to avoid contentions with IP based “heavy” traffic. In someembodiments, the RTS packet FIG. 26 and the Action Frame, 27 are shortpacket types used and attractive candidates for individual chirp packettransmissions to the Access Point (AP) that first receives them.

In some embodiments, even blind chirp devices can include the DURATIONinformation 3422, so IP based devices and other Chirp devices withlistening can avoid contention during the time that chirp packets areknown to be active. Further, if the device follows a known transmissionperiodicity/pattern, then the AP can preemptively clear thecommunication medium, by sending out a Request to Send/Clear to Sendframe (CTS) that effectively silences both chirp aware listen capabledevices and 802.11 client stations.

If blind chirp devices use larger packets then blind chirp packetsshould register their chirp pattern with the nightlight/router. Eachchirp must then also contain the chirp pattern sequence number in eachtransmission. Then the router can generate a CTS in anticipation, sinceit knows both pattern and sequence number. The CTS will thereforepreannounce the time reservation made for the blind chirp device. Thusprovisions exist for larger blind chirp packets, contingent oncoordination with the device's local router.

If listen-capable chirp devices use larger packets, then they alsoshould register their transmission patterns when first pairing with thenightlight/router. The router can then generate the anticipatory CTS.Additionally, routers, based on the type of traffic pattern it isseeing, can direct these chirp devices to reposition their time oftransmission to avail of a bulk CTS with a duration value set to covermultiple sequential device chirps.

This embodiment is, in effect, the reverse of FIG. 20. In FIG. 20, thebulk transmission from the AP to multiple listen capable devices ismanaged by sending out a bulk transmission to all and informing then ofthis common time. During this time the VOIP like chirp like devices areexpected to silently listen. Conversely, the chirp router can alsospecify when the chirps from devices should occur so they are contiguousand thus covered in bulk periodically. Now, the devices are also beingtaught when to talk—sequentially. Thus the forward and reverse methodsproactively deal with chirp contention using multiple means includingthose described in Ser. Nos. 11/266,884, 61/615,802, 61/555,400 et al.Chirp routers are acting as the collaborative scheduling agents andengendering collaboration between chirp and non-chirp clients in sharingthe same media with minimum contention. Embodiments include chirp awaresmart phones, Wi-Fi Access Points and other devices, where a logicalradio “slot” provides the requisite software/firmware functionality.

Inherent Security in Chirp Data Transport

Chirp data transport involves traversing the IP network, in someembodiments, and are thus susceptible to snooping/hacking. But this isnot your typical IP data packet since the data is based orChirp/Pollen-ID and/or Flower/Agents-ID etc. These are not typical IP orMAC-ID type Sender/Receiver Address Frames, 26 through 28. However thesame format is available for chirp devices use to specify, if desired:

-   -   a) The IP Destination Address (if applicable), and can include        other addressing information depending on the type of        transmission involved—e.g. unicast, multi-cast or broadcast,        3520,    -   b) Chirp-ID (in the Sender Address frame, SA, 3522),    -   c) Agent-ID being sought (in the BSSID Element, 3524)    -   d) Any other use of the IP frame formats, recognizable by an        agent.

All options (and their variants) exist within the exemplary Action Frameformat, suitable for transmission over standard WIFI networks.

FIG. 28 shows a measurement request action frame, 3630. These managementor action frames look like the innocuous request from stationsrequesting information from a specific AP (with BSSID). Only chirp awarerouters are aware that these are actually chirp packets and that thedata in the DA, SA and BSSID is to be interpreted differently.

Further, chirp routers know just enough to decode the DA, SA and BSSIDdata sections, FIGS. 27-28, to provide necessary routing. They cannotdecipher the vendor specific information elements—only specificagents/tunes/flowers hold those keys. In other words, routers canengineer the “winds” and “buses” to move the pollen, define theschedules for the buses, based on QoS settings in IP-like packet, but donothing else.

How does the Chirp aware router recognize a chirp packet? In oneembodiment, the router knows which interface transports Chirp packets.It has a complete list of 802.11 stations associated with this AP. Aspart of the tree topology, it also has a list of all stationsdownstream—via the downlinks, FIGS. 3 through 7. It does not have accessto the routing tables up stream, as part of the tree based routingscheme. However, it may use distributed SIP registries that contain bothchirp device and agent ID locations. Ser. No. 12/352,457 describes usingdynamic SIP registries to provide VOIP phone connectivity within dynamicisolated clusters. The same principles may be used to define whereagents/flowers are, or the reverse look up—where chirp devices are, ofinterest to a particular agent.

Through either SIP like registries, or the routing table of its IP basedstations, each chirp aware router is aware that these chirp packets arenot emanating from one of their 802.11 clients/stations. No one else inthe system—both outside the mesh network and within it has thisinsight—access to the distributed routing tables of 802.11 clientsand/or distributed SIP like registries is needed.

Even without the aid of SIP-like registries, chirp routers are stillcognizant of the special nature of the data packets being transmitted.Chirp routers are keeping track of which interface was used to injectthe IP packet into the mesh network. In the mesh nodes shown in FIGS.13, 19, there are multiple interfaces generally provided—the uplink anddown links of Backhauls (BH and FD) and the client Access Points (AP).If the chirp packet came in through on of the APs, then it is marked asa chirp, since the Chirp ID provided does not match an associated IPbased client's IP address or MAC-ID in its routing table. Note that theAP does not need to keep a list of chirp devices it services—it surmisesits identity based on the exclusion principle, namely, this device ID,if an IP based device, is not in its routing tables. This implies, thatchirp device locations and identity do not have to be stored, ifanonymity is desired. The chirp will still be forwarded. up and/or downthrough the up links and down links the mesh tree, marked as a chirp insearch of the agent/tune/subscriber. The identity of both chirp and itsinterested agent/tune/flower may be hidden and yet the pollen will reachthe flower. This extends existing prior art IP based routing security.

Thus, in one embodiment, even with both Chirp-ID and Agent-ID hiddenagents who receive broadcast chirp packets, are the only ones privy towhat is being said, by whom, and intended for whom, using this specificdata format etc. And only these agents can route such packets to otheragents in its private SIP like registries, have them or other agentsinform routers to stop broadcasts other otherwise affect the routing—ateach step along the bus delivery route.

Further, an agent can convert the data flow to be IP based, with regularIP addresses. In one embodiment, private networks coexist and span bothchirp and conventional transmissions using “pattern” hopping techniquesknown only to them. Part of the data could travel as IP Data frameswhile others via chirp protocols, analogous to musical chords or dualsignatures needed on a check. Only agents know the (chorded) “tune” Thisfurther obfuscates the chirp data flow.

In embodiments, chirp data comprises IP based transport packets whoseformat is regular and legitimate IP-based packet. It supports all theFrame Control feature sets, FIG. 26, 3420, including multiple frames,power management and Distribution System (DS) flags. Thus, competentagents, running on chirp aware routers, may also convert IP data(including VOIP packets) into chirp packets, send them anonymously toanother agent and then reconvert them back to IP traffic. Thisobfuscates IP based data flow. Thus both Chirp and IP payloads may beused interchangeably to obfuscate data flow within both chirp and legacynetworks.

Approaches to Small Data Results in Big Data

FIG. 28 depicts the Measurement Request Action Frame, as arepresentative versatile Chirp packet. In one embodiment, themeasurement data field 3630 is of variable length for flexibility. Insome embodiments, three one byte sections are provided 3624, marked asCategory, Action and Dialog Token respectively. Thus each sectionsupports 255 non trivial variations: Each chirp packet has 255 ways ofexpressing:

1) Category: What type of chirp data is being transmitted

2) Action: Which State information is being sent.

3) Dialog Token: What type of data format, parameter list is being used.

Despite the terse length of chirp transmissions, there are sufficientvariations to define precisely the type and nature of data beingtransmitted. Each of the 255 categories for each chirp device have255*255 different ways to express machine state as classified underAction, and Dialog Token. Thus M2M communications may be terse butspecific in terms of the data provided to “small” data integrators.Further, chirp devices may follow patterns in bulking transmissions.Thus 5 different measurements, for 5 distinct variables, may betransmitted in one payload or five smaller ones. Further, since theDialog Token defines the “key” to parsing the data, it could alsorepresent 255 unique parameter list orderings. Thus the chirp data canbe jumbled between patterns making it difficult, like secret handshakes,for snoopers to decipher content, especially since the pattern used isalso changing, like temporal keys, but with significantly loweroverhead.

Agents can operate on other agents. Hence one agent can forward thechirp—after massaging the data, if needed—to another agent and so on.Agents can also spawn other agents, so distributed computing and routingis engendered. Thus one agent could clone itself to generate twocontainers so two buses concurrently carry containers to differentdestinations. Note that pruned broadcasting mechanisms, see Ser. No.11/266,884, ensure that chirp like VOIP packets are transportedselectively. Further SIP-like local registries, see Ser. No. 12/352,457,may also be used as subscribers/agents interested in specific chirps.

Complex business process logic flow is thus possible through a singleagent spawning multiple collaborative agents, all of which emanated fromreceiving a chirp. By distributing the intelligence in an agent basednetwork needed to service the chirp, chirp data, while terse, is stillvery powerful. Terse data need not be restricted to simplemindedfunctions. Note that in nature, simple ants create complex colonies. Bythe same token, chirps can be terse but not “simple” in the aggregate.Multiple chirp flows through a distributed mesh network, will interactwith a hierarchy of agents. Some provide propagation. Others serve asIntegrator agents operating on multiple chirps, to generate meaningful“small” data and situation awareness. An agent based network is asignificantly more powerful means of providing dynamicrouting/propagation agents and higher level functions, like integratoragents, all within the same distributed meshed network.

Propagation/Routing agents also signal to each other, in someembodiments,—so if one agent receives the packet first, it can tell therouting agents in the chirp aware routers to stop broadcasting, thuscontaining broadcast traffic proactively. Agents on mobile devices canmove from one router to another, to further obfuscate theirlocation/identity.

The routing agents MESH CONTROL and SCAN depicted in FIG. 9 may exposetheir API to selected agents who may then change the routing tables andredirect traffic at both local and remote mesh nodes. A dynamicallyreconfigurable routing architecture emerges where agents drive therouting/scheduling of delivery at each logistics hub, working inconsonance with the Mesh Control Layer, FIG. 16 and its features, FIGS.17 through 24. The Collaborative Scheduler 61/555,400 is another agentavailable in the support framework. Together, they ensure pollen reachesintended flowers as/when requested.

In some embodiments, agents are physically located on a mesh node ornode clients (e.g. removable USB security stick on a laptop clientdevice). Agents may also physically reside on the mesh node, FIG. 12 ona card slot or Ethernet port in the node. They can also be baked intothe firmware at flash time, see FIGS. 14, 15. And they can also be“registered guests”, through software that manages the ACL and otherlists that Access Points use, for example. Operating inside the meshnode, they can redirect massaged data to a secure server, through securesocket connections. Many agents may be mobile, with intermittentconnectivity, see FIG. 23, 24. Since the connection is both intermittentand short, the data flow is not useful from a snooper's perspective.Further community mail boxes agents, resident or remote, may be used tobuffer recent broadcasts for the agent and obfuscate flow. Applying anagent/tune/flower female receiver oriented approach provides a transportmechanism which is inherently more secure and more versatile, withoutrequiring any changes to legacy systems.

In some embodiments, the base level chirp/agent discovery process ismulticasting/broadcasting. The pollen/flower search is driven by chirpID and/or Agent ID, through Chirp Aware Routers. Extensions includeinter agent communications within the Agent “Social”Network/Collaborative Ecosystem. Thus, very private internalbroadcasting clusters may form, within the outer layer of the baselayers.

Two different network “trees” emerge. The physical network tree haschirp devices at the edge, edge router/relays to core router “roots”.Similarly, the agent social network is, at their “root” level, big dataagents. Below them is myriad agents massaging/filtering/integrating thesmall data chirps requested by them. Further, the big data “root” agentshave access, at the root level, with other fellow roots. Each root agenthas access to all of its agent in its sub trees. These include agentsthat change routing rules, and schedule the “buses,” to remain indynamic alignment with changing publisher and subscriber “blobs” ofactivity, see 61/555,400. Recall that chirp aware routers provide bothchirp and IP based connectivity. Command and Control directives may thusbe securely and speedily transported between agents. A hierarchicalscheduling system emerges, where higher layers set the adaptive modelparameters for lower layers.

Chirp capable nightlight embodiments exist in the form of smart phones,with Chirp Friendly sensors/transceivers e.g. IR, Ringtone, Light orTactile Patterns/Tunes. Consider in one embodiment a secret rendezvousbetween “app” or agent “red” with agent “blue”. In FIG. 31, 3940, thesoldier has made contact and their smart phones exchange indecipherablechirps.

In this example, the soldier returns to his unit, 3940 and smart phonesexchange information again, as part of buddy system-if the soldier didnot return the data is not compromised. Distributed agents (local andremote) confer over the mesh network to decrypt the information anddisseminate relevant snippets to individual smart phones. Oneinformation snippet may be the time and place for the next rendezvous.Only the “chosen” phone owner receives this message at a “schedule”defined by stacking agents, see 61/555,400 et al. Thus agent based“social” networks may form, merge, disperse with agents dynamicallymanaging the “schedule” for dispersal of secret information.

In chirp agent worlds, pollen will find the right flowers, eitherthrough brute force (e.g. multicast, broadcast) or more subtle means,with chirp nods, winks and secret handshakes inside a distributed butsecret agent referral and forwarding system. An agent meshed networkforms on top of the mesh routing delivery platform of buses, winds, mailboxes and other features described herein. Hierarchies within thesesmaller close knit self-sufficient communities include, in someembodiments, integrator agents, who assimilate chirps, regurgitate toproduce “small” feeds and ship those, also using the same deliverymechanisms to upstream big data agents. The integrator agents may searchand find other “blue” agents, FIG. 31 and collaboratively put disparateand diverse snippets together to feed “big” data.

Chirp Datagram Handling

Some new IP based packet handlers will need to be invented to stem thedeluge of largely repetitive and non critical data. Since sensors do nottypically have large memory, sending it up will be the common option.Periodic IP connectivity will be mandated.

The IoT version of the publish/subscribe world of pollen and flowers issignificantly different from our traditional IP based networking withits roots in point to point communications:

-   -   Its usually unidirectional—many chirping devices, may not have        listening capabilities, so the communication is one way only.        Receiver address is then meaningless.    -   The IP packet header overhead is unacceptable for small chirp        packets and the IP protocol was designed to be general purpose        and static—you cannot use the bit stream to define your own        genetic strands and its vocabularies. This is too restrictive        for a burgeoning class of devices that simply chirp a few bits a        day but want to be sure their chirps get to the right flower.    -   Since the same data source may be of interest to multiple        subscribers, point to point communications make little sense—its        simply kicking the can up to a central server that then still        distributes data as part cloud services for subscribing        Integrators. Contemporary thin client paradigms are based a more        direct link between devices and integrators, via incumbent IP        based traffic flow. Device (raw) data is forwarded up to big        data cloud servers, where the economies of scale favor        centralized processing. This is a top heavy architecture where        point to point transport is convert into more usable        publish-subscribe format only at the top.    -   A more balanced architecture, especially if device (raw) data is        repetitive, is to provide some pruning/aggregation and exception        handling closer to the publisher sources, rather than pay for it        to travel upstream and then be discarded. If the devices in the        thin client model can support it, it will be tempting to move        some of that processing downstream, resulting in fatter clients.        Putting more processing into every device does not favor        economies of scale.    -   A more economic and efficient model would be to provide a        central “hub” for device raw data to massaged into more useful        forms for cloud servers. Big data subscribers are interested in        massaged “small data” that fits into the format needed to feed        the big data analytics. Intermediate agents fill this gap        between raw data and big data. In short, some form of agent        based local processing makes sense, regardless of whether        devices are IP or chirp based. The control loop, is then split        between the devices and agents and then the agents to their big        data subscribers. In the thin client model, there was        effectively one control loop between devices and servers. With        the agent hub in place, devices may converse with the hub, in        native dialects. The agents convert their bird speak in to a        form more palatable to the vocabulary and formats of big data        servers. The device publish stream is being converted into a        small data stream, which big data servers are subscribing to, in        addition to receiving raw data, if needed, on a case by case        basis. The overall architecture is more scalable and more        efficient.    -   In this distributed and balanced setting, a local agent of the        big data server can manage what exceptions interest them. The        task of pruning and aggregating is delegated to a lower level of        control. Round tripping is obviated. Using the Mars Rover as an        analogy, Houston is kept abreast of “interesting” developments        but local control of sensors/actuators in handled autonomously        by resident software agents. This obviates needless round        tripping between the rover and Houston, providing a more        equitable distribution of task and resources. This is more        efficient since it also reduces both traffic and server load.        The output is from agents is more palatable “small data”

Regardless of whether device communication is IP or chirp based, alayered control loop, (with agents as intermediaries acting as thetranslation mechanisms between the upper and lower control loops) isinherent more efficient than round tripping. Some devices, like smartphones, are inherently chirp capable (e.g. IR and Wi-Fi) and canparticipate in both control loops, acting a bridge between the two banksof the river, each with their own control loops.

Beyond round trip latency considerations, there is a more fundamentalreason for this tiered control and communications model. The languageand vocabulary of sensors is fundamentally diverse from that at the bigdata server level. Sensors publish their limited view of the world,while “Big” data provides insights into a more comprehensive world view,incorporating multiple sensor streams, past history, future trends etc.Since function dictates language and vocabulary, some form oftranslation is required—one cannot expect purpose built machinery tocommunicate directly without translation.

In the contemporary, thin client model, FIG. 48, Left, that translationtakes place in the cloud, where data is sent in a format palatable tobig data consumers. Needless to say, that puts the onus on the machinesand their M2M communication protocols to be intelligible. What was aterse purpose built dialect now has to be interpreted in a deviceabstracted language. Agents and their location within the lower controlloop reduce this burden, FIG. 48 Right.

An intermediate agent based architecture is also closer topublish-subscribe frameworks that big data systems are familiar with.Cloud servers, through web services, subscribe to multiple sources ofdata. Big data systems may be viewed as market places wherepublishers/subscribers or data providers and consumers meet andexchange. The “exchange” is one service that enterprise middlewaresoftware provide at Layers 7 and above on the network stack. Forexample, Tibco provides a platform where real time feeds are bothpublished and consumed. Multiple and diverse applications employ genericand extensible real time publish/subscribe “exchange” infrastructure toconduct business.

Another type of “exchange” is burgeoning at the lowest edge of thenetwork, see FIGS. 49 through 50. M2M communications is rapidly evolvinginto its own form of localized publish/subscribe exchange, with its ownfunction driven vocabulary. This community of sensors and actuators willneed for their own, potentially private/isolated exchange. Many to onerelationships, like any publish/subscribe framework needs to besupported. The smaller communities coalesce into a community tree ofcommunities, but with flattened information flow, akin to bus routesalong the network of mesh nodes and their agents.

FIG. 51 is an example of a small community of sensors, providing, vitalsign inferences and warnings gleaned from pattern/trends of multiplesensor streams. A field of such local integrators, generating smalldata, feed into progressively larger streams, see FIG. 52. Here, acomposite view of the current ground moisture level is integrated withweather forecasts of likely rain to direct whether some areas of thefield need additional water.

Simplifying the transport mechanisms of sensors and actuators hasprofound and compounded network effects. If sensors are no longerburdened by an incumbent IP protocol, not designed to be inherentlypublish-subscribe or exchange based, then they than free chirp is terse,purpose built organically grown, collaborative communities. The DeweyDecimal system, for example, enables terse content classification sharedacross all library “exchanges”. Its analogous implementation couldfunction as pollen category classifiers. Now, raw sensor dataimmediately becomes sort, search and publish worthy. Further, thedecision to combine multiple sensors into a composite firmware packagecan be validate by subscriber trends indicating their interest in alocal integrator/small data generator. The circuitry for the Chirptransmitter on the propagator/integrator is then shared, see FIG. 53 andthe combined device provides additional functionality. FIG. 54 shows anintegrated multi-sensor package.

FIG. 55 shows a network of chirp propagator nodes. Each of the elementsin the four leaf clover configuration are transceivers. Thetransceivers, in one embodiment, are identical, so that uplink, downlinkand scanning functionalities may be logically assigned. The networktopology is flexible, when required, see FIG. 1. One layer of this 4element propagator services chirp IR traffic. Layers are stackable,since they are operating on different, non interfering wire-less medium(e.g. IR and Wi-Fi). When Chirp and IP traffic are operating in the sameunlicensed band, then the propagator proactively reserves time slicesfor chirp devices, using well understood reservation techniques (e.g.RTS/CTS).

Control Loop Polling Intervals

The social network or community of M2M participants, will, over timeform their own real time market place, with links to the enterpriselevel market places in the cloud. Some form of linking the two marketplaces is needed, without forcing either to coalesce into a singlecontrol loop, thin client model. As an analogy, the Mars Rover is asingle entity functioning semi-autonomously with at least two controlloops. The lower control loop, operating every few milliseconds, closesa tight, purpose built, isochronous loop between sensors and motors,keeping the Rover on track with its planned destination. The highercontrol loop, operating in minutes (between Earth and Mars), cannot beused for tight motor control. It is, instead, used to provide planneddestination coordinates, for example, which is then translated to lowerlevel commands and activities by the intermediate translation layerbetween the two control loops.

Compare, in FIG. 50, the overhead of centralized process biased approachon control loops and associated latencies. In the thin client model,latencies are compounded by those the non deterministic latency of IPCSMA/CA and CSMA/CD protocols, over multiple hops from source todestination. In the dual control model, there is a membrane separatingthe upper and lower control loops of IP traffic and Chirp traffic(includes IP devices operating as chirp devices, when needed). Data flowbetween the membrane is publish/subscribe based. The Propagator hubmanages bus schedules in both directions so both control loops aresatisfied. Ideally, neither should be waiting on each other. For this towork, the two control loops can run on different frequencies but bothneed to be aware of the timing diagram needs of the other.

One implementation requires hubs to publish their incoming trafficschedules upstream. Upstream ascendants on the mesh network or routingpath, can then back calculate when a chirp bus of aggregated packetsneeds to arrive so their “stock” feeding into their business processes,is maintain in a regular, non-disruptive rate. It can communicate that“demand” to the “supplier” node. The aggregated demand at the supplierdrives it to be in dynamic alignment with its subscriber. This mayinvolve more frequent smaller shuttles. Conversely, it may dictateconvoys but will lower frequency. The two control loops arecollaboratively changing their polling intervals if needed.

Layered control systems often have set polling intervals, generally amultiple of the lowest loop e.g. the sensor/actuator level. In thinclient situations, with no pruning/aggregation and exception handling,the need to close loops quickly is understandable. Hence the historicalneed for tighter polling at upper control layers. With agent baseddelegation to the lower control layers, Mars Rover successfullyconverted Task level commands, sent asynchronously, with minute delays,to drive low level isochronous control sensor-actuator loops, operatingin milliseconds. Upper control loops no longer have to be “tight.”

When inevitable packet transport failures to accommodate do occur, thedegradation in performance of the overall system is still graceful,because the small data generation uses pattern matching and inferences,sometimes operating in a composite device, FIG. 54. Hence early warningsystems are activated sooner, at the local level. Local evasive actionwithin local M2M sensor/actuator communities, obviates adverse networkeffects. Disruptions are both graceful and contained.

A Classification Based Protocol for the Edge Network

With intermediary agents and membrane in place, individual sensors andactuators may simply evolve their language and vocabulary for what theywere designed for them to do. This intermediate agent service thenbridges the gap between raw data and big data. Now, devices, using theirown, proprietary pollen formats can chirp in their own dialects—nostandard common language is needed. Devices can remain simple, agentscan be arbitrarily complex.

Further, nothing stops devices operating in both networks and formingtheir own bridges. IP agents can decipher the IP encapsulation where thepayload is a aggregation of chirps and perpetuate the publishing beyondchirp membranes.

Beyond efficiency (large packet formats etc) there is a more fundamentalreason to support a different transport protocol, rather than couch anew description language inside the payload section of an IP packet. Butit is still a destination based routing protocol. It is not inherentlypublish/subscribe.

Packet type ID in the packet header provide the information needed todrive the routing according to associated packet handlers. Adding newpacket handlers vocabulary and protocols for IP based M2M communitiesposes a challenge. Routers have to know how to route these new types ofpackets. The new “agents” need to be accessible across the entire routernetwork core and edge routers, including legacy routers.

Further, while there are known classifications for sensor types, but itsan evolving field—providing specialized packet handlers within therouters, to handle their routing needs is not practical. Standardscommittee processes are long, tedious and largely controlled by thelarger networking companies, with a vested interest in maintaining thestatus quo with IP for everything. New devices, such as composite sensorarrays FIG. 54 and private, semi autonomous communities, FIG. 55 arejust beginning. They will require their own private, terse, tightcontrol loop. Some organic evolution is called for.

The primary reason for chirp based devices is their inherent simplicityand that protocol may organically evolve to support device categoriesnot yet dreamed of, let alone how they interact with us and the world.Burdening these publisher/subscribers with the detritus and restrictionsof a solely IP based transport is simply too small a canvas for thedevelopers of these brave new products to create in.

IP formats were designed for coarse classifications of packet typerouting handlers: e.g. Voice, Video, Web browsing, File transfer.Application specific granularity(Devices->Sensors->Moisture->Device-Type-A) cannot be easily expressedin a format intended to address sender oriented communications based onIP addresses and MAC-IDS. The type of data may be expressed in thepayload section, but peering in payloads, slows down traffic. There areinherent limitations to sender oriented traffic flow.

Nature uses a Receiver oriented network. Pollen publishers have noreceiver address per se, nor do they know where their ultimatedestination will be. A pollen category based identification scheme isreceiver oriented—the pollen simply travels in all applicabledirections, it is not destination based. It is the onus of thesubscriber to accept (flower) or reject (sneezing) the pollen. CategoryClassification publishing connect pollen to flowers in an inherentlymore direct manner.

Routing Based on Category Classifications

What would such an extensible protocol look like? In Nature's DNAsequencing, there are strands of genetic code that are recognizable.Sometimes there is a marker that helps align samples so we can see thestrands repeat across specimens. Genetic fingerprinting is extensible.

In Nature's world of publish/subscribe, pollen is being published forsubscriber flowers. Pollination is essentially a selective patternmatch. The same logic will now we applied to the IoT Publish/Subscribeworld. Here chirp pollen, eventually arrive at a bus station. Chirppollen have no idea where to go—this is a female/receiver orientedworld. What does the chirp bus station hub need, in order to perform itsfunction? It needs to know:

-   -   Where the flower in search of this pollen/passenger is and    -   When the flower requires the pollen/passenger to arrive there.    -   It can then drive the bus schedules to ensure an equitable        compromise between bus size, its frequency and cost of IP during        different times. Smaller bus loads will leave more frequently,        for passengers in a rush, others will be compensated by a lower        bus price for travelling on the larger but less frequent        convoys.

Thus supply and demand of the chirp packets and its arrival is driven bydynamic subscriber demands. Scheduling of packets is covered underCollaborative Scheduling, in a referenced application. it relates themoving packets closer to delivery schedules ahead of others less in arush. This is a dynamic form of prioritizing, based on pollen life andsubscriber demand.

For now, we return to challenge of putting pollen/school children on thecorrect buses. At the bus station hub, pollen/passenger will collect andshould be directed the bus best suited for them. This must be determinedlargely by public information, provided by the chirp/pollen, as itsgenus type, depicted by a DNA like strand of data in its public categorybit stream.

Like DNA markers, only the flower knows where to look for the markersand what they are, to determine if there is match. Further, there can besmall changes in the data—it does not have to be error free. As long asthe markers are not corrupted, the faulty data will still find its wayto bus station. There, it may be examined further, to determine if itshould be put on the bus or discarded.

If Markers are corrupted, they may still be relevant, if a gradationscheme is used. Thus, consider a 4 bit marker 1.0.1.1. Assume that it ismistaken read as 1.1.1.1. (e.g. 15 instead of 11) Pattern 15 requiresByte 1 in the category field to be A,B,C or D. Thus matching sequencesin the DNA strand will eventually result in this pollen pruned and sentto a dead letter section. Since chirps are repetitive, this loss is notcritical. Note however that false positives are being progressivelypruned—before chirps board IP buses.

Using markers in a relative manner, as opposed to fixed settings in anIP packet is a light form of security, like pollen—only the intendedflower knows how to decipher the payload. Note that “markers” between“packet header” fields is fuzzy, unlike IP packet headers. This makessecurity “light”.

Propagators simply need to know what direction to send the data—up ordown the network tree. This is not complex in a tree structure with O(n)routing. Recall, this is not a peer to peer network, requiringO(n2)computation of routing paths, as suggested by traditional sensornetworks, e.g. Zigbee. Thus, the direction (up/down) suffices in treestructures. And the direction should point to where subscribers are.

In addition to aggregation, propagators, in conjunction with theirsubscriber preferences may also be needed to perform pruning. Trafficflowing upwards from remote moisture sensors in the Wine country inFrance, to an Amazon hosted cloud service in the United States, couldwell be small, but, given the number of such sensors, the IP traffic issignificant. IP traffic is not free: some means to control what is sentover IP is needed, specifically, prune repetitive data, close to itssource (as opposed to the cloud server/Integrator).

Local pruning and aggregation favor placing agents closer to the sensorraw published stream. Here the subscribers/their agents have morecontrol over what they want sent to them. A subscription model woulddefray the cost of transport and pruning.

Skeletal Architecture of Chirp Packets

Locating the subscribers efficiently and developing the correct busschedules and routes, is of common interest to both pollen and flowers.As in spring, there is a finite time of life for the pollen to havevalue to flowers.

Propagators, need some pollen genus category description to enable thematch-making: what does this descriptor look like? As an analogy wereturn to bird chirps. We have categorized bird chirp sounds, based onstudying individual bird categories. We can identify the bird type fromits chirp/tune/melody. Hence those subscribers interested in melodiesfrom doves, can now receive those recordings, based on bird category.The categories will have to support different levels of granularity—somebird enthusiasts are only interested in doves near their homes. Hencethe category field, should be sufficiently flexible in design, tosupport further drill down.

In both melody/tunes and DNA structures, there exist “Marker” strands ofinformation that provide a common pattern across members of thecategory. These markers occur at specific locations and are of specificpatterns. Thus, some categories may be described as those that have an 8bit marker, always in the 4th byte of the bit stream. Thus theclassification could be 4.8.XX.XX, where XX are more levels ofgranularity that may be gleaned from knowing a specific pattern type andwhat it entails, in terms of how to further classify the public (nosecurity but not necessarily universally decipherable) category field.

Consider the 8 bit pattern is 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1 or 255. 255 may indicate apattern where the 4 bytes are 4 one byte classification sub categories.Thus a 4 byte genetic strand may now be interpreted as A.B.C.D, wherethe letters occupy one byte each. The complete category is thus4.8.255.A.B.C.D. In one embodiment 4.8.255 is publically accessiblepattern information and at the start of the bit stream, the location andsize of the marker (255) is specified, as opposed to at the end of thepublic category shown in FIG. 48. This enables a quick bit mask to lookfor all publishers in categories 4.8.255 etc. Those capable of providingfurther granularity in the chirp signature will need to access patternthat provides the map or implicit field markers for A.B.C.D within thecategory strand. Thus, in one embodiment, all of the following providedeeper classifications of the pollen/chirp/uniform:

4.4.8.4.8.255

4.8.255.A 4.8.255.A.B . . .

Thus Propagators, depending on their access to internal field data, canalways provide at least 3 levels of addressing (e.g. 4.8.255) andpotentially the complete DNA strand/signature. That may be sufficientfor coarse aggregation: pollen of the same feather may be flockedtogether. At least three levels of granularity in bus schedules aresupported. Larger, infrequent convoys cover 4.8.XX categories, whilesmaller shuttles for more frequently requested data can specifyprecisely what is of interest e.g. 4.8.255.A.B.C.XX Pollen categoriesthus drive the bus loads, their contents and their frequency, atdiffering levels of granularity.

Note that A.B.C.D is distinct from B.A.C.D. In general there are 4 *3 *2*1 or 24 non null combinations for a 4 letter vocabulary A,B,C,D.

In another embodiment the set of 255 8 bit pattern markers denote eight4 bit markers. Now the pattern arrangements are 8 *7 *6 . . . =40,320arrangements of 8 letter vocabulary: Since 4 bits support up to 15 nonnull numbers, 8 distinct letters are easily supported within 4 bits.Like DNA, the vocabulary may be terse and small, but the patternsdepicting the category are not. Small data can be rich in content.

Incognito Pollen:

Some pollen may need to travel incognito. That is, hey expectpropagators to rebroadcast them, potentially in all directions, till anagent discovers them.

A “4.0” category pollen implies a marker at byte 4 but its length is notspecified. Agents with bit mask filtering can locate such semi-incognitopollen, they know what the marker is. Note the marker can be arbitrarilylong or short. Short markers increase the occurrence of false positiveswith other marker types (e.g. 4 bit markers 1.0.1.1 sharing same 4 bitsas 8 bit marker 1.0.1.1.0.0.1.1). agents that have this level ofinformation can also glean other data from the packet melody/strands, tofilter them out.

A “0.0” category pollen does not specify either the location or size ofthe marker. This is completely incognito and the propagator may continueto rebroadcast the pollen both up and down the tree till it reacheseither roots or leaves of the tree. Chirp devices have no access to theIP network except through the bridging propagators. An agent at thechirp interfaces is either present or the pollen dies. It cannot crossthe Chirp Membrane. Hence IP traffic congestion is obviated.

In some situations, a 0.0 pollen may wish to specify a direction andnothing else—e.g. up or down the tree. Thus, in one embodiment 0.0.1pollen are upwards, while 0.0.2 pollen are downwards. Since eachcategory has its own vocabulary and language, 0.0 chirp families maychoose to use the next two bits to define direction (0.0.0.1, 0.0.1.0),as opposed to marker size. Languages defining how the strands of DNAcomprised by bit streams are both versatile and secure—since it isgenerally receiver oriented.

IP based sensors and their traffic may also use category patterns aspart of their data classification schemes. In that case IP based packetheaders will specify the sensor MAC_ID or serial number within thepayload, in addition to the category classification for IP based agentsin the cloud servers or local to the IP interface of the propagator. Bythe same token chirp devices, may, in their private payload or publiccategory type, contain an IP address where they wish their pollen to besent. The chirp interface of the propagator receives this chirp, localagents/apps decipher it, prune it, repackage as needed for IP highways.

Individual Information within Chirp Signature

Beyond category information, bird chirps carry individual/privateinformation, see FIG. 48. Nature's random number generator changes theindividual birds chirp tonal qualities, governing each bird. This servesas a form of identification. Thus, mother birds know each of theirchildren's distinctive chirps, though all are using the same chirpfamily packet format and its associated shared vocabulary.

The IoT counterpart of this individual identification may include:

-   -   1. Chirps at distinctively different patterns (e.g. tunes)    -   2. Public category classification, include some ID e.g. last 4        digits of the manufacturer SKU number of the device.    -   3. Lineage based—e.g. child of kitchen router.    -   4. Location based: e.g. located in kitchen, close to toaster.        (from signal strength analysis)

Note the combination of chirp tune, its last 4 SKU, location and lineage*collectively* define a distinct bird/sensor. While none are unique,their combination is sufficiently distinctive. Uniqueness is notrequired.

The combinations have inherent randomness since their constituentelements (e.g. transmission pattern of chirps) are random. They are notunique, like IP or MAC ID addresses, so there is no burden ofmaintaining a global database. Pretty good distinction in the bird chirpis sufficient for the mother. By the same token, pretty good distinctionis sufficient for the bus drivers e.g. propagators.

Note that individual data, typically in the private section, may also bepresent in the public section. Thus, some common types of sensors, e.g.Moisture, may not need to a private section: the data may not need to besecured.

Transmission Agility Information

In the event chirps share the same Wi-Fi medium, one part of the publiccategory section needs to contain chirp transmission characteristics. Inother words the “uniform” should support network agility. Smarter, moreagile devices can become aware that simpler chirp devices will be activeat intervals specified. Thus, data related to when and how often thebirds chirp and what pattern they use (as in melody/tunes or rhythm) isneeded by both propagators and agile devices to ensure they the networkcan anticipate and hear chirps distinctly and without co-locatedinterference on the same “channel” from other devices. Note that innature, bird chirps are syncopated—birds are cognizant of each other.This data also gives propagators the option to shift smarter, more agilechirp devices to other times. Or the propagator, after review of localclient device transmission patterns, can request a change to thedipswitch settings of a device. The devices that support suchflexibility, is again, part of the Pattern Marker et al. Thus, aftersome tuning, there may be sufficient distinction in the melodies somother propagators can easily recognize individual offspring.

Extensible, Non Unique, Pattern driven Chirp Signatures

A skeletal view of the Pollen “Uniform” emerges. It contains patterns,defining other patterns, each of which provide a more refined level ofdetail. Access of that detail can be controlled to answer:

1. What type of pollen is being transported (pollen category)2. How often is this data published3. What is its publishing frequency pattern (may be dynamic, may needobservation over time, implying learning and discovery)4. Distinguishing features of individual chirp devices e.g. serialnumber, location, lineage)5. Information on transmission pattern so agile devices can share thesame medium without interference.

Note that all of the above is easily discernable by rudimentary bitmasks—that is, if you know what pattern you are looking for. Thus, inone embodiment a propagator agent is instructed to look at bit location13 in all 4.8.11 packets. If it is set to 1, that is a universal flagfor “unit malfunction, type 1”. The agent is required to convert thatinformation into an IP packet and forward to the manufacturer specifiedin a byte 1 (e.g. A in 4.8.11.A.B.C.D).

The public section defines the chirp/pollen category, needed for busscheduling and packaging of packets. This is sort of like the birdcategory. Without this category information, the propagator does notknow which direction to send the packets, as in which bus route toemploy going up, down trees and where to clone more packets formulti-cast transmissions when multiple subscribers exist.

The second, typically private, section is the message—what a particularbird is saying and some (typically private) information about thisparticular bird. It uses the same concepts as the public section, but ithas its own locations of where markers are, what those pattern signifyand hence where the implicit field markers are. The 4.8.11.A.B.C.Dfamily may use a completely different scheme for the private sectionthan the 4.8.11.A.B.D.C strand/family.

The public and private parts of the chirp packet are separated by apublically known Public-Section-End-Marker. It is of variable length. Inone embodiment, it may be 4 bits or 8, depending when whether 15 or 255different types of (public) chirp patterns are needed. Note that if only7 different markers are needed, then a 3 bit marker suffices (2**3=8).

Some default public markers will be provided, through consensus orstandards bodies. These will be reserved for common use by sensormanufacturers of a specific category e.g. all moisture sensorsmanufacturers will use a category A.B.C.D.E.F, a 6 byte categoryaddress).

In that exemplary 6 byte genus family a end-of public-section-markerwill always appear at the end of the 6th byte. It will be one of thedefined types. New types may be added as within the size of the markerin bits. Thus, if manufacturers feel that 255 distinct markers areneeded to define a second level of granularity in the categoryclassification, then they would jointly agree to support a 1 byte (8bit) marker and its associated overhead.

Note that with 6 bytes there are a total of (2 exponent 8) exponent 6 or(248-1)non null unique category assignments. Further, with an eight bitmarker type, the sub type classification now supports (256-2) categoryclasses.

All chirp packets may not need 6 bytes of classifications. If it 4bytes, then the marker appears at the 4 byte partition. How does oneknow where to look for the marker quickly and efficiently? In oneembodiment, the first part of the public classification categorycontains both marker location and its size. For example, theclassification category pattern with 6 bytes would have the 8 bit markerposition 6.8 stated so before the public section begins. Withoutknowledge of the location and size of the marker, the entire packet isgibberish, recall classifications are based on public marker location.

One embodiment reserves the first three bits of public category field todefine the end marker location only and the fourth bit is the size ofthe marker. If both are specified then both marker location and contentsare extractable. The category field can then be deciphered based on themarker pattern description. The Marker pointer is shown in the start ofthe packet but is also a variable. If some propagators do not know ofthis new type of bird chirp, they will simply send it upwards. This isone way pollen can direct the winds that carry it.

In one embodiment, the first three 3 bits for the Marker positionsupport 7 marker locations. These may adequately express the location ofthe marker, e.g. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 bytes long.

Note that the same Marker Number (e.g. #200) provides diverseinterpretations simply by its location. This is similar to DNAsequencing, where the location of the distinctive sequence helpsrecognize and align patterns.

Category Byte Size

Many simple devices may require only one byte for category (255variants) and another 4 bit marker for the pattern type, see FIG. 48.Thus each of the 255 category numbers may be interpreted up to 15distinct ways. This allows for close to 212 interpretations of a 1 bytecategory field. Similarly, a 6 byte category/genus would allow for(248-1) variants, each supporting 255 patterns (8 bit Marker). The“genetic code” describing a sensor category, may be expressed inmultiple ways using this extensible pattern based format.

For non zero byte public sections, the marker type provides all theinformation needed to interpret it. The pattern defines where thecontent subsections/fields reside within the public section. Hencesimple devices, may use a larger public section to include data, alsopublic. Here no private section is needed/used.

A zero byte location is defined, in one embodiment, to mean that thereis no public section. The Marker type points to a data pattern whichprovides the information needed to interpret the private section,following the (empty) public section. The Marker pattern is then beingused to interpret what follows generally as payload. Thus flexible useof the Marker Pattern is supported, beyond its intended use. Thus amarker pattern and associated classification of the data packet maytogether constitute an IP packet payload. This is relevant to IP basedsensor streams that prefer IP connectivity over Chirp to IP bridges.

Marker Pattern Templates

Sharing the same marker type, at the specific locations (e.g. 1 byte)engenders collaboration between manufacturers of the same sensor type.They may agree to jointly use a range of Marker types (e.g. 200-220),which share common fields, but use other fields, both in the public andprivate sections to provide more detailed and/or secure information. Anshared used marker pattern template emerges through this collaboration.

Creating a new marker type (#221), may not require the traditionalcentral standards body review process because the repercussions arelocal. For example, introducing a new marker type in location 1, affectsonly the 1 byte public category users. Within that, it affects those whowish to use the same marker pattern number. Contrast this with definingan new IP header format. IP headers must comply with IP requirements inorder to be readable. This is potentially affecting all users.

The Marker Template is therefore a organically evolving pattern maskingscheme that helps consumers delve deeper into the publicsection/category classification ID. As such, it loosely resembles IPV4or IPV6, subsections of the entire IP address. Note however that IPaddressing is destination based. After the packet reaches itsdestination, the payload is deciphered, in the cloud. Then theinformation, perhaps still device specific, is device abstracted. Thencomes pruning and aggregation in the generation of small data. The smalldata is now publishable, within the distributed processing of big dataservers (e.g Hadoop based). It must now be inserted into thepublish/subscribe framework of web based services.

With Chirp Category templates, small data is generation closer to thesource, where it can have more impact in tightersensing-control-actuation loops. And since it is category based, finergranularity is simply a matter of loading the appropriate agents, at anylevel within the chirp network or chirp-aware IP agents—that know how tolook into IP encapsulations of aggregated small data.

In one embodiment, the category section this a bit stream withcontiguous fields, like strands in a DNA sequence. Knowing how to lookinto it, helps decipher the bird chirp category better. But thisrequires more processing and is therefore intended for subscribersinterested in finer granularity. As the pollen progresses up stream, itcontinues to be disseminated with finer targeting to the interestedsubscribers, who can also drill down themselves, if they prefer, byrequesting broader category searches.

The lowest level of granularity needed for the bus drivers is simply themarker location and its number. Hence Byte 6, 4 bit Marker, value1.0.1.1 is sufficient to get the pollen to Bus type 06.4.11. This issufficient to get the pollen/chirp to a 6.X bus station.

At the bus station for 6.4 buses, specialized 6.4.11 travel agents mayperuse the category pattern to uncover two more sub categories each ofwhich, are specified by the pattern description to be 1 byte each. Nowit is known that category is 6.4.11.250.250. Subscribers willing to payfor this level of detail are alerted. Thus chirp/pollen can be veryspecific in terms of where they want to go, using a variable patterntemplate structure.

Again, pollen is implicitly managing the winds that carry it, sincemanufacturers can decide where those agents are placed along the routestarting with 6.4.11 and getting progressively finer.

Bus schedules are now driven by the bus load and when the packets needto delivered. This is related to the collaborative scheduling engine,where the coffee order and its delivery are aligned to provide lowerstacking and better quality of service/Customer satisfaction. The sizeand content of the packets is being managed to ensure timely delivery indynamically changing scenarios. This becomes a more tractable problem asmore refinement into the pollen category is possible closer to thepollen publishers. However having pattern matching agents 6.8.001through 6.8.255 (8 bit marker) resident at the bus station requires CPUprocessing—this may be an enterprise chirp router but overkill for thehome.

Hence multiple types of propagators emerge, each with their own categorytypes. Or SIM cards slots are provided, so categories of chirp packethandlers may be supported. Some packet handlers will be secured tospecific hardware; others may be software agents/apps.

Thus, yet another means available to pollen, to direct their wind, is tospecify the propagator category or agent type it is in search of. Agentsreside on propagators or in the cloud. Their existence is knowninternally within the propagators tree like mesh network. Hence going upor down the tree will eventually move the pollen towards its handlerwithin the chirp network. The agent handler can then provide the smalldata that needs transport over the IP highway, via the chirp buses.

If the propagator has no category pattern agent then it will kick thecan upstream. Alternately, in one embodiment, a public pattern template(e.g 255, 15) specifies how detailed navigation details are in thecategory section, e.g UP 3, DN 1, Left 2). Here the network topology isbeing used to find the flower this is relevant to static, securenetworks, where the topology is managed. Note that the directions canencompass both the chirp network topology and it parent IP based networktree, in an hybrid mesh network comprising of both.

Routing Agents/Apps and Network Loading

The marker number is essentially a pointer to a look up table ofpatterns, see FIG. 48. Device manufacturers have multiple optionsregarding how to use the marker patterns. In one embodiment, by mutualagreement, 15 and 255 denote navigation based information for 4 and 8bit markers respectively, e.g. (North 4, East 1) Further in anotherembodiment, 14 and 254 denote IP addresses in 6.X classification schemesfor 4 and 8 bit markers. Thus two public means are made available forpollen to specify their intended flowers. IoT pollen can drive the windsthat transport them, all the way into IP land, without agents.

Pollen intentions can thus be explicitly encoded. Or it may be fuzzy, asin: “look for an agent that knows about 6.8.11.A.B”. Here, thepropagator network and its routing tables are needed. The routing tablekeeps track of where the clients are, includes chirp devices and chirprouting agents. Some chirp routing agents/apps may be on the Chirp to IPbridge, and capable of securely accessing the entire categoryfingerprint, peruse the contents and decide what to do with it.

The efficient path of the pollen is thus gated, filtered and thenredirected at progressively finer sieves, akin to Zip Codeclassifications for mail. Letters that fit “standard” patterns (size andweight) are processed efficiently. Others will be dealt with after thesimple stuff is completed—this is how greedy algorithms work. The pricepaid for the flexible chirp format is that non standard package typeswill emerge and must be handled albeit less efficiently.

As an example, in one network, there are a handful of byte 4.8.XXcategories, others are all 2.4.XX or 6.8.XX. It would make sense to movethe 4.8.XX agents to a propagator that handles more 4.8.XX buses. A4.8.XX bus central hub emerges, at least temporarily, based on thecenter of gravity where 4.8.XX pollen and their subscribers are. Somechirps may have more hops to travel but by economies of scale, 4.8.XXbus deliveries and scheduling become easier and less costly. The systemcan support declining margins.

Dynamic loading on the network is examined by nodes of the hybrid meshtree (of both IP and chirp devices), from the root of the IP tree,downwards. System administrator are notified, who can move the agentsresiding on the network nodes. This will alter the pollen path andstreamline flow. Further, if the agent is mobile (as in not locked to aparticular physical device) then the network can automatically move theagents to where overall traffic flows best. This is akin to changingmesh network topology to meet changing latency and throughputrequirements.

Both the physical network topology and the logical network (based onwhere agents reside), eventually stabilize and learn to adapt thetopology to provide stable, tunable bus schedules and routes. At eachhop along the network tree, pollen in being pruned and aggregated. It isbeing pruned along the path, at each bus station, since pollen has arelevant life and may have outlived it. Or the subscribers have lostinterest. It is being aggregated at each bus station hub along the routeto meet bus schedules and economic passenger quota. Publish andSubscribe sides of the demand/supply chain are thus in dynamicalignment.

Propagator Node Networks and Operation

Trees come to mind when we think of Nature's scalable creations. Treesare older than Man and have a highly evolved networking structure thatis both efficient and adaptive. The structure is recursive: Any part ofthe tree replicates the same structure. The underground roots are aninverted tree, branches are horizontal tree, all connected through thetrunk. A network of trees, some “rooted” to the tree trunk, othersthrough relay nodes. The logical and physical network of branches allfollow one simple rule: the “uplink”—the head of the branch is alwaysone. An pitch fork branch (one with three roots to the tree trunk) wouldbe considered a freak of nature. It is this simple rule—one uplinkonly—that ensures O(n) routing. Scalable Networks are possible.

The tree structure is emulated in the IoT world envisaged. For exampleconsider the propagators P0, P1 . . . P3 see FIG. 56. P0 is the “root”node since it has an access to the IP network bridge. P0-P1-P2 form astring of pearls relay for chirp clients C3 and C4. The both share thelineage P0.P1.P2 and hence are identified as siblings. Lineage is partof their identity.

Propagators form sections of a sub tree, the simplest of which are astring of pearls e.g. P0->P1->P2 forming a link in the chain requires atleast two interfaces e.g. uplink and downlink transceivers. For example,P1 slot 0, is an uplink connecting to P0 Slot 0. P2 slot 3 is a downlinkproviding connectivity to P2 uplink slot 0. By convention, Slot 0,refers to the uplink, except for root nodes (P0). Root nodes have onlydownlinks—their uplink is the IP bridge.

The propagators are shown with 4 transceivers e.g. Infrared LEDs orother short range wire-less transceivers. They are placed in the generalvicinity and with arbitrary orientation. Propagators periodically scanthe environment and reorient/reassign the slots so there is always oneuplink connecting to a parent propagator node. The choice is based onthe best available effective throughput, all the way back to a rootnode. The parent selections are not always smaller hop based. Forexample, P2 may be able to “see” P0 but throughput P0->P2 is inferior toP0->P1->P2. In other words, Min (throughput P0->P1, throughput P1->P2)is still better than (throughput P0->P2). In the event it was not, P2would logically reorient its uplink, so Slot 3 would now be the Uplinkfacing Slot 0 of P0.

Thus, a 4 slot transceiver, with arbitrary orientation, may logicallyreassign slots 0 through 3 to ensure connectivity back to an upstreamroot node. The slots 0 to 3 are thus being dynamically reassigned tomaintain an effective tree based network topology.

Managing Latency in Network Tree Topologies

Propagators are placed in locations where they can form tree branches asshown above, all the way to a “root” node, that bridges to the IP edgenode. Chirp networks extend the edges of the IP network without addingadditional overhead to the IP end of the network and also serving aspruning and aggregation agents for IP based subscribers. In effect, theypresent alternatives to the current IPV6 thin client model, which, evenif intermittent connectivity is assured, requires data to travel up thecloud before its essence is extracted. The cost of IP transport isminimized. And the cost of more expensive and power hungry IP awaredevices is concurrently avoided.

Some chirp data is more time sensitive than others. Kicking the canupstream to big data cloud servers, simply burdens both the edge andcore network infrastructures. Further, Moore's law is linear, whileMetcalfe's in O(n2). As the sensor data at the edge grows, processorspeeds (for both routers and cloud servers) will not keep up. Hence M2Mtraffic latency will deteriorate or become more expensive. Hence somerelief is needed at the source of the deluge—the edge of the network.Here pruning and aggregation of only “relevant” data brings things backinto balance. Metcalfe Effects are kept in check.

The primary function of the propagators/relays nodes is to send upstream“relevant” data, which agents, residing in their firmware, haveexpressly requested. The agents know the categories of interest.Additionally there could an exclusion list provided—for categories of nointerest. The nodes will record the existence of those categories in thenetwork, but will not forward. This reduces up stream traffic.

One cannot always know, a priori, the type of categories of interest,any more that winds can always provide focused beams of pollen to theirawaiting subscribers. Some discovery is needed, through, at the veryleast, notification, from “mother” propagators, that a new category ofsensor “bird” chirps have become “active” in a geo location under itscare (e.g. sub tree of network). Notification summaries of sensoractivity would therefore be periodically provided. Interestedsubscribers can then direct their agents/apps to provide the level ofgranularity/aggregation/pruning/exception handling needed.

Over time, an agent based social network emerges, agents logicallyreside at main branches of sub trees, where there is sufficient dataflow/analysis to justify to additional processing power needed in thepropagator. It is thus tree based, in accordance with O(n) scalability.There would be consumer and enterprise versions of such propagators. Inconsumer versions, there are limited agents at the node—most data may bepushed upstream to parent nodes and their agents, all the way to cloudservers. This multi-hop path and its associated latency may beinacceptable for some mission critical enterprise applications. In aprevious era, Programmable Logic Controllers, (PLC) wired to sensors andactuators on the factory floor, managed the deluge of real time, latencysensitive M2M traffic, escalating only that which fell out of their rulebased relay ladder logic diagrams used by PLCs. Today, that sameapproach may be applied to rule based agents residing on propagators,close to the sensor/actuators. This reduces latency for enterprise classM2M communications.

Beacon Heart Beats

The extensible chirp protocol may be used by propagators also, toprovide information at various levels of granularity. Within thepropagator community there will be specialists who will connect only toother specialist relays. They may limit their relay efforts to specificchirp categories or devices thereby forming a private and exclusivelogical chirp network. These specialists may use other nodes to providetheir transport and routing, but in effect, the meaning of the databeing routed in intra specialist.

In order to support routing requests from the wider community, allpropagators collaborate when possible—in service of the larger network.Thus basic routing is part of a common protocol and language, extensionsare specialist/navigation agent based.

The basic routing is akin to layer 2 wired switch stacks and theirwireless mesh node equivalents, see FIG. 1. In both cases, tree topologyensures scalable O(n) routing overhead. In each case, there is only oneuplink.

The very basic “beacon” information that relays may transmit mustminimally include the hop cost, toll cost and parent name. The parentname is needed, because then a prospective child can talk directly tothe parent. Recall the grandparent manages scan and switch events.Hence, they know if a better parent is available but is out to lunch,performing a scan. Thus, a propagator node may be left awaitingassociation permission from a prospective parent node's parent till ascan is over. This delay ensures that connections once made do not haveto switch to a better candidate, discovered after some later scans. Thegrandparent is being proactive.

Thus, the very basic heart beat from all nodes must contain:

1. My name

2. My Parent Name

3. My hop level—from the root node

4. My Toll Cost.

The orphan, during its scanning period after power up, sends andreceives probe requests from multiple connected nodes in its vicinity.It can surmise which candidates are siblings, based on their parentname. Should it join either sibling, it is assured of collaborativealternatives within the same sub tree (the aunts). This engenders its“survival”, in terms of redundant paths with minimal changes—the rest ofthe sub tree back to the root node is unchanged, between siblingswitches. Routing updates are only needed at the last hop. In contrast,switching between entire sub trees is more onerous, especially if thatsub tree's siblings are not available as back ups. Survival favorsjoining sub trees with multiple accessible sibling mother/aunts.

Latency and Throughput Tradeoffs

Beacon heart beats enabled orphans to discover potential parentpresence. Their relative proximity is measured during probe requests, todetermine effective link quality and include that in its selectionprocess. The total available throughput in a string of pearls link issimply that of the weakest link—the link with the worst “performance”.

Candidate parents may thus receive pings to test aggregate link qualityall the way up to the root node. In general, each node has an inherentpredilection to choose the best “lineage” to connect with. But there aretradeoffs. Ideally, all things being equal, nodes would wish to connectas close to root nodes as possible—since M2M traffic is largelyupstream. However the link quality to a distant node, may be a lot worsethan going through intermediary nodes.

In the simulations above, overall back haul throughput, from allupstream traffic to the root degrades as the tree topology (Caption 1)is modified by Toll Cost/Hop Cost ratios favoring low hop cost. Noticethat Caption 4 is the familiar hub and spoke, single hop topology—withthe worst overall throughput.

In addition to overall link quality, ascertains through pings, theavailability of the candidate parent to service additional requestsdrives the final decision. Great overall backhaul throughput is academicif the node is already saturated, based on its limited processing power.

Toll Cost provides the nodes level of availability. Higher toll costnodes are being selective, mindful of their own limitations andtherefore protecting their existing clients for being crowded out. Thusallegiances are formed, where propagators develop preferences to belongto particular sub trees that demonstrate healthy characteristics (e.g.multiple sibling accessibility etc.)

Routing Table Updates

Having joined the network, nodes must now relay chirp broadcasts intheir vicinity. Nodes have one uplink, to maintain the tree structure,though multiple uplinks, servicing disparate trees (to avoid cycles) isalso permitted. Multiple downlinks can service both chirp and IP trafficon both the same and distinct wireless interfaces. The uplinks, could beeither chirp or IP based (e.g Wi-Fi).

For each disparate uplink, routing tables are maintained that providelayer 2 switch stack functionality. Packets are moved either up the treeto ancestors or down the tree to descendants. The decision is based on acondensed routing table, updated by each node, based on comprehensiverouting heart beat sent periodically and circulated within the relevantsub tree.

Thus nodes, operating on different frequencies, send out heart beatsreceived through its uplink to a parents downlink. It then rebroadcastsit, both on its downlinks and uplinks, operating on differentfrequencies. Nodes now receive updates on their own uplink and downlinkchannels and disseminate the information to their own sub trees. Ineffect

Nature's equivalent of allergy season is in effect. It is seasonal,because each heart beat is tagged with a counter number. Since heartbeats will travel multiple paths in broadcasts, nodes ensure that thesame counter number is not rebroadcast. Further, each node and itsagents may decide how far up or down the tree to provide the broadcast.For example, a parent switch to sibling aunt requires no furtherbroadcasts than the last hop routing table.

Eventually, each node is aware of

1. its own immediate children

2. In the case of propagator nodes, their children etc

3. Adjacent nodes that may serve as alternate parents

4. Its current overall current link quality and throughput

5. Through scanning, the overall link quality of alternate parents

Over time, the cost of switching back and forth is reduced by developingmore data on both the current parent and its alternatives. Thisinformation leads to stable networks at the local levels.

The routing table is available to all members of the current sub tree to(at least) the level of a grandparent. Thus each node is aware of isentire sub tree of descendants below it, at least two hops down. Afterthat, it is somewhat irrelevant, since its grandchildren, on having thepackets delivered to them, will know how to relay it further. All thegrandparent needs to know is *roughly* where the chirp parent node,resides e.g. which portion of its descendant sub tree—a generaldirection of routing suffices. In the event chirp devices move around,one or two packets intended for them, will be lost (there is no retry orretransmission in chirp world). But most traffic is upstream. Itsuffices, for each chirp descendant under its care, nodes need only beaware of:

1. Chirp device Descendant's immediate parent propagator2. Location of that parent node within its sub tree (e.g. lineage)3. Hence a lineage path from root node to chirp device exists.

Some chirps will be picked up by multiple propagators. They will allrebroadcast the packets, in the directions specified (up/dwn). Howeverin each case it will tag the packet with the chirp device's immediatepropagator, which is the last part of a lineage tree. Multiple chirppackets will thus travel separately up stream through different relaypaths, from multiple propagators that pick up the chirps in theirvicinity. Multiple lineage paths are available.

Multiple paths is useful when redundancy is desirable. Such is not thecase with chirp sensor data and the relative unimportance of any singlechirp. Hence pruning of multiple paths is performed at the grandparentlevel. Chirp packets are relayed through one node only, typically thenode closest to it and therefore the best link quality. Others, alsopicking up the chirps directly from the devices, are directed to ignorethose chirps. The chirp device is now assigned a unique lineage or relaypath back to the root. Thus, even in the case of unidirectional chirpstreams, an association is made, to prune redundant traffic.

A tree based, scalable, hierarchy driven control system emerges, wherefilters are applied to progressively reduce redundant data upstream.Here is the beginning of small data, as data being sent upstreamcontinues to be more refined as it passes through multiple rule-basedlogical sieves. The agents may be simple, ant like, but their strengthalso lies in numbers and their ability to support multipleinterpretations of the same data and provide that perspective withsignificantly lower latency than if everything was pushed up to thecloud. There are situations where raw chirp data needs to send all theway up, but like the Mars Rover, when latency matters, some level oflocal autonomy is essential to the survival of a network burdened at theedges.

Thus, in this model of IoT, As schools of chirps travel upstream up theriver to the root, agents at strategic locations along the chirp routemay perform local pruning, aggregation and exception handling, therebyreducing the traffic and improving load performance. Since multipleagents can be operating on the same data, some form of collaborativescheduling and sharing of timing requirements is needed. This will bediscussed in a later chapter.

Returning to pruning lets examine the savings in IP traffic for a 100sensor network. Consider, for simplicity, a 10 node string of pearlschain, each propagator/relay supporting 10 sensors, all the way back upto the root. For example, these sensors could be part of an undergroundcoal mining tunnel, with propagators forming the life line for both IPand chirp traffic.

Simple Rule based logic watches the methane gas occurrence across thetunnel. As you would expect, methane exposure at one region, would alsoaffect adjacent regions and hence a blob of methane gas publishers mayappear abruptly and unexpectedly.

Sending such “exception handling” upstream to big data servers isclearly valuable. It is questionable whether routine and acceptablereadings would be sent over the cloud. But without some local handling,there is no way of defining an exception, without a base line of routinereadings. Hence agents may also maintain some short history.

It is to be understood that the above description is intended to beillustrative, and not restrictive. For example, the above-describedembodiments (and/or aspects thereof) may be used in combination witheach other. In addition, many modifications may be made to adapt aparticular situation or material to the teachings of the inventionwithout departing from its scope. While the dimensions and types ofmaterials described herein are intended to define the parameters of theinvention, they are by no means limiting, but are instead exemplaryembodiments. Many other embodiments will be apparent to those of skillin the art upon reviewing the above description. The scope of theinvention should, therefore, be determined with reference to theappended claims, along with the full scope of equivalents to which suchclaims are entitled. In the appended claims, the terms “including” and“in which” are used as the plain-English equivalents of the terms“comprising” and “wherein.” Moreover, in the following claims, the terms“first,” “second,” and “third,” are used merely as labels, and are notintended to impose numerical requirements on their objects. Further, thelimitations of the following claims are not written inmeans-plus-function format and are not intended to be interpreted basedon 35 U.S.C. §112, sixth paragraph, unless and until such claimlimitations expressly use the phrase “means for” followed by a statementof function void of further structure.

The embodiment of the invention in which an exclusive property orprivilege is claimed is defined as follows:
 1. A tree-shaped meshnetwork comprising: a mesh of wireless nodes forming a tree shapednetwork with one root node having a connection to an external network;chirp clients; and wireless network clients; wherein chirp clientscomprise low cost chirp devices wherein said low cost chirp devicestransmit short duration messages wherein transmission of said shortduration messages are scheduled at preset transmission intervals;wherein at least one wireless node of the mesh of wireless nodes is adesignated chirp-aware node wherein said chirp-aware node sets thepreset transmission intervals for chirp client communication bybroadcasting a beacon prior to transmission by chirp clients and saidchirp-aware node further comprises a bridge between the short durationmessages and IP based devices wherein said bridge includes a wirelessreceiver to receive the short duration messages and is connected to saidexternal network; wherein the short duration messages are encapsulatedinto action frames, for onward transmission to other chirp awarerouters; wherein each wireless node further comprises two logical radiosand a service radio wherein each wireless node uplink and downlinkoperates on distinct non-conflicting frequencies; and wherein saidwireless network clients communicate with said wireless nodes using saidservice radios.
 2. The tree-shaped network of claim 1 wherein said nodesfurther include firmware which allows the nodes to designate a type ofshort duration messages which are requested by network.
 3. Thetree-shaped network of claim 2 wherein said chirp-aware node sends shortduration messages to its parent node only if the short duration messageshave been requested.
 4. The tree-shaped network of claim 1 wherein saidnodes further include agent processing software wherein said agentsprocess the short duration messages received by said nodes comprisingthe tree-shaped network, wherein said agents process the data prior tosending said data to a parent node.
 5. The tree-shaped network of claim1 wherein nodes comprising said tree-shaped network switch parent nodesto lower a number of intermediate nodes to a top node within the treenetwork and wherein prior to switching to a new parent a node sends aprobe message to test the signal quality at the proposed new parentnode.
 6. The tree-shaped network of claim 5 wherein said signal qualityinformation is transmitted by a node as part of a heartbeat informationwherein said heartbeat information sent by the transmitting nodeincludes a name of the node, a name of the parent node, a distance tothe top node within the tree network, and a toll cost value.
 7. Thetree-shaped network of claim 6 wherein said toll cost value comprises avalue assigned to the current processing power usage at the transmittingnode, a value count of active terse message and propagator children, anda value assigned to a link quality back to the root node.
 8. Thetree-shaped network of claim 5 wherein names of nodes are assignedrandomly with the constraint that a parent node may not have twochildren with a duplicate name.
 9. The tree-shaped network of claim 1wherein said short duration messages do not include a fixed recipientaddress, and further wherein said short duration messages include aduration field, and vendor-specific information.
 10. The tree-shapednetwork of claim 4 wherein said agent comprises a navigation agent and adata handling agent wherein said navigation agent only processes adestination portion of the short duration message.
 11. The tree-shapednetwork of claim 10 wherein said destination portion comprises physicaldestination information within the tree-shaped network wherein saidphysical destination information comprises node by node directions. 12.The tree-shaped network of claim 11 wherein said destination portioncomprises logical destination information wherein said logicaldestination information comprises a designation of data handling agentfor said short duration message.